Effects of column and superstructure stiffness on the seismic response of bridges in the transverse direction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transverse seismic responses of continuous 4-span bridges designed based on the 2006 Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code were studied using inelastic time history analyses. A total of 648 bridge configurations were considered in which the column heights, column diameters, superstructure stiffness and mass as well as abutment restraint conditions were studied. The maximum ductility demands obtained using elastic and inelastic analyses were compared to study the influence of the degree of irregularity. The effects of column stiffness ratios and superstructure to substructure stiffness ratios on the maximum ductility demands and concentration of ductility demands were investigated. A number of different regularity indices were compared to determine the suitability of these different indices in predicting the influence of irregularity. This study demonstrates the conservative nature of the 2006 Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code and provides some guidance on factors for determining the degree of irregularity and suitable regularity indices when carrying out nonlinear dynamic analyses of bridges.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".