MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W566522409

Construction of Field-Cast Ultra-High Performance Concrete Connections

2012· article· en· W566522409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ben Graybeal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative concrete reinforcement materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteBridge (graph theory)EngineeringDeckBridge deckDurabilityStructural engineeringJoint (building)Span (engineering)GirderField (mathematics)Forensic engineeringCivil engineeringComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is an emerging construction material that has been demonstrated to advance the state of the art for construction of prefabricated bridge elements and systems (PBES). Specifically, UHPC allows for significant simplifications in the design of the component connections, while simultaneously affording enhanced durability and simplified construction practices. As of early 2012, 18 bridges in the United States and Canada have been constructed using field-cast UHPC connections, and this note displays two of those bridges. The first bridge shown is the first bridge in the United States to use field-cast UHPC connections. Eight simple span deck-bulb- tee girders were joined with non-contact lap splice deck-level connections. The second bridge has precast concrete deck panels and field-cast UHPC connections. However, as with any new technology, initial deployments of field-cast UHPC technology face hurdles relating to inevitable construction process changes. This TechNote provides an introduction to many of the topics that should be considered when deploying UHPC connections.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative concrete reinforcement materialsFrench-language works237,207