Discussion of ???distinction between punching and flexural failure modes of flat plates???
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In particular, he criticizes that the shear strengths' equations in these sources do not include n.\\n The design steps in practice are: select the thickness of the flat plate as a ratio of the span to avoid excessive deflection; determine n values at midspans and at the supports, to resist the bending moments obtained by elastic analyses for the loading cases that produce maximum positive and maximum negative values due to factored loads; check the punching shear strength to ensure that it exceeds the maximum demand with the appropriate loading case; and provide shear reinforcing means if necessary. Scarce tests on three-dimensional structures give information on the behavior of the entire structure (for example, Sherif [1996], Sherif and Dilger [2001], and Dechka [2001]), and at the same time confirm that the behavior of the zone of the slab-column connections can be safely predicted by tests on isolated specimens, for the same V, or V combined with M. REFERENCES Dechka, D. C., 2001, "Response of Shear-Stud-Reinforced Continuous Slab-Column Frames to Seismic Loads," PhD thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, 2001, 472 pp.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".