MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W168611155 · doi:10.2495/str050221

Seismic Vulnerability Study Of HistoricalBuildings In Old Montreal: Overview AndPerspectives

2005· article· en· W168611155 on OpenAlex
Marie‐José Nollet, Omar Chaallal, Karine Lefebvre

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on the built environment · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryVulnerability (computing)Vulnerability assessmentInfillSeismic riskSeismic hazardCivil engineeringInduced seismicityVulnerability indexTypologyEngineeringForensic engineeringGeographyGeologyComputer sciencePsychological resilienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a review of the vulnerability evaluation methods available to study a group of buildings in the historic Old Montreal district based on their structural characterisation. The seismic vulnerability of structures is one of the key elements, along with the seismic hazard, site effect, value and exposure, to determine the seismic risk associated to a group of buildings. The city of Montreal, in Eastern Canada, has an effective seismic zone of 3 and 4, respectively, which is qualified as moderate to high seismicity on a scale of 0 to 6. Therefore, there is a need to develop tools to evaluate the seismic vulnerability of existing constructed facilities. Montreal historic buildings constitute an important and valuable segment of these facilities. A comprehensive inventory of Old Montreal buildings and their structural characteristics led to the identification of the dominant types of structure: unreinforced masonry bearing wall structures and moment-resisting frame structures with infill masonry walls. A review of the existing procedures for the evaluation of the seismic vulnerability of groups of buildings based on the European and North American experiences was carried out and procedures based on structural typology are considered as the most appropriate for this group of buildings along with the development of simplified models to obtain vulnerability functions.

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 score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · 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