Environmental compatibility study of steel and GFRP anchors with stones used in heritage structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historic buildings speak to our past through the art and ingenuity of our ancestors.As stewards of these buildings, it is our responsibility to ensure that they are protected for the generations to come.Following internationally accepted heritage conservation prac- tices is critical to protecting heritage buildings.In the case of historic stone masonry buildings in Canada, this often entails the protection of the heritage masonry itself.Of particular interest to this study is the effect of reinforcing heritage masonry with modem materials and ensuring that these modern reinforcement techniques do not have a longterm detrimental effect on the masonry itself.This research project focused on various anchor assemblies in order to better understand the long-term compatibility between traditional and new materials.In this study, the thermal compatibility of embedded anchor assemblies in wet and dry environments of masonry was examined.In this research pro- ject the effect of these anchor assemblies on the permeability characteristics of the stones and the susceptibility of the anchors to lose strength as a result of freeze-thaw cycling in wet and dry conditions was also investigated.'...'98 4.4 Static pullout tests ....'..........99 4.4.1 Static pullout behaviour of limestone and GFRP anchor assemblies .............
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".