MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

STUDY OF THE COMPOSITE ACTION OF HOLLOWCORE PANELS USED IN GIRDER-SLAB SYSTEM

2019· article· en· W4407598732 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nathalie Roy, Serge Parent, Mélissa Barrière

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of International Structural Engineering and Construction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposite numberGirderStructural engineeringSlabAction (physics)Composite materialMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Floor construction with precast hollowcore panels produced by Lafarge Precast Edmonton results in a commonly used girder-slab system. Continuity between the elements is ensured by bent rebars and shear studs. Once all these elements are installed, a structural concrete is poured between the reinforced concrete panels and over the entire floor. The extent of composite action between the rigid diaphragm and the steel beams is not known. Therefore, its potential benefit is not taken into account in the current design procedures for the steel structure. The main components of this research project are the following: an experimental program consisting of a series of 6 large-scale shear tests were carried out. The outcome of this research shows that there is a potential for a composite action between a hollowcore plank and a standard hot rolled W shape. It was found that there is enough confinement to develop the steel stud strength when the beam is connected to the precast prestressed concrete panels using a 1/2" shear stud embedded between the planks and under two to three inches of concrete topping.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of International Structural Engineering and ConstructionSame topicInnovations in Concrete and Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207