Comportement des poutres en béton armé renforcées en cisaillement à l'aide de matériaux composites avancés
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche doctorale avait pour but de contribuer, à travers des investigations théoriques et expérimentales, à la compréhension du comportement des poutres en béton armé renforcées en cisaillement à l'aide de matériaux composites avancés (Fiber Reinforced Polymer: FRP). Les investigations théoriques comprenaient, entre autres, un état des connaissances exhaustif sur le renforcement en cisaillement à l'aide de FRP. Les investigations expérimentales ont été menées à travers un programme d'essais étendu, totalisant 34 tests, conduits sur des poutres en grandeur nature. Quatre paramètres ont été étudiés: (a) le taux de FRP; (b) le taux d'acier transversal; (c) le type de poutre; (d) la taille des poutres. Les nombreuses données recueillies à partir de ce programme d'essais ont aidé à mieux comprendre les mécanismes de résistance mis en jeu et à développer un modèle de calcul de la contribution du FRP à la résistance qui se veut rationnel et compréhensible
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".