MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399921727 · doi:10.18280/mmep.110623

Identification of Critical Factors Influencing Early Age Creep of High Strength Concrete Using Artificial Neural Networks

2024· article· en· W4399921727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lana Ayad Abdulateef, Salim T. Yousif

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreepArtificial neural networkIdentification (biology)Materials scienceStructural engineeringForensic engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceComposite materialArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ensuring precise estimation of creep characteristics is critical for the efficient design of structures prone to creep deformation.Creep is an indicator of permanent and gradual deformation that transpires within a material when it is continuously subjected to a burden for an extended duration.In addition to the temperature and duration of load application, the degree of creep in concrete is also affected by the material's inherent properties and the length of time it has been exposed to the load.The enduring consequences of creep might result in significant distortions that give rise to structural deficiencies inside the edifice.Multiple factors, including the concrete's mixing ratios and compressive strength, affect the initial hardening of the material.The data pertaining to the early creep behaviour of high-strength concrete were gathered from relevant literature sources for the purposes of this study.The research utilised artificial neural network methodology and relative importance analysis to ascertain the most influential parameters on the early creep behaviour of high-strength concrete.Understanding the components that contribute to creep is crucial in mitigating the detrimental effects of creep on concrete and concrete structures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207