MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409787556 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-361

Optimized calculation of bearing capacity of short columns of steel-tube-concrete hybrid structures combined with genetic algorithm

2025· article· en· W4409787556 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWest Anhui UniversityAnhui Provincial Department of EducationAnhui University
KeywordsGenetic algorithmBearing capacityStructural engineeringTube (container)AlgorithmMaterials scienceBearing (navigation)Computer scienceEngineeringComposite materialMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research proposes a new optimization technique for reinforcement concrete filled structural tubular columns using genetic algorithms and unified strength theory.A complete theoretical model to determine the axial bearing capacity of reinforced CFST columns incorporating modified confinement coefficients and enhanced steel section properties was developed.The optimization procedure deals with performance of the structure, materials usage and construction convenience as the optimization goals.Experimental validation for ultimate bearing capacity of five full scale specimens was carried out and the deviation was found out to be 5.2% which was found to be predicted by the theoretical model accurately.Internal stiffeners are likely to increase axial capacity by about 15.7%-23.4% over traditional CFST columns.The relationship between stiffener parameters and performance of the structure was found to be critical with optimal height to thickness of the stiffener to be in the range of 30 to 45 and space to diameter ratio no greater than 0.5.The problem sets out such mathematics as is nowadays simply necessary for the modern construction world to have at their disposal, as well as reasons for designing reinforced CFST columns.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.868

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207