Performance of concrete buildings in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake and implications for Canadian codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At 12:51 pm local time on 22 February 2011, a M 6.2 aftershock of the 4 September 2010, Darfield earthquake shook the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. The aftershock occurred on an unmapped fault less than 10 km from the city centre resulting in significant damage, particularly in the Central Business District (CBD). The earthquake resulted in the collapse of two reinforced concrete office buildings, one parking garage, and numerous unreinforced masonry buildings, including many heritage structures, leading to 185 deaths. Liquefaction was wide spread in the CBD and the eastern suburbs, resulting in foundation movement for housing and office buildings alike. Many buildings in the CBD experienced severe damage, some requiring demolition, necessitating careful controlled access to the CBD in the months following the earthquake. This paper summarizes the recorded earthquake shaking and observed damage to concrete buildings in CBD, with a specific focus on identifying future research and possible changes for seismic design practice and codes in Canada to address the Christchurch observations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".