MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1564902797 · doi:10.1002/eqe.2290

Shake table testing and numerical simulation of a self‐centering energy dissipative braced frame

2013· article· en· W1564902797 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of TorontoCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEarthquake shaking tableStructural engineeringBracingOpenSeesFrame (networking)Dissipative systemBraceResidualStiffnessBraced frameEngineeringSoftwareComputer scienceFinite element methodMechanical engineeringAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The self‐centering energy dissipative (SCED) brace is a new steel bracing member that provides both damping to the structure and a re‐centering capability. The goal of this study was to confirm the behavior of SCED braces within complete structural systems and to confirm the ability to model these systems with both a state‐of‐the‐art computer model as well as a simplified model that would be useful to practicing engineers. To these ends, a three‐story SCED‐braced frame was designed and constructed for testing on a shake table. Two concurrent computer models of the entire frame were constructed: one using the opensees nonlinear dynamic modeling software, and a simplified model using the commercial structural analysis software sap2000 . The frame specimen was subjected to 12 significant earthquakes without any adjustment or modification between the tests. The SCED braces prevented residual drifts in the frame, as designed, and did not show any significant degradation due to wear. Both numerical models were able to predict the drifts, story shears, and column forces well. Peak story accelerations were overestimated in the models; this effect was found to be caused by the absence of transitions at stiffness changes in the hysteretic model of the braces. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.183 · 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