MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971234302 · doi:10.1002/eqe.766

Assessment of the frequency domain decomposition technique by forced‐vibration tests of a full‐scale structure

2007· article· en· W1971234302 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 · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsSNC-Lavalin (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVibrationFrequency domainStructural engineeringAmbient vibrationEngineeringTime domainEarthquake engineeringScale (ratio)Computer scienceAcousticsFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dynamic characteristics of buildings are of utmost importance in earthquake engineering. The vibration periods are required to determine design loads, and damping is necessary in time‐history analysis. These parameters are generally obtained through forced‐vibration tests (FVTs) or after a seismic event in the case of permanently instrumented structures. However, for large civil engineering structures, FVTs are often too costly or practically difficult, and ambient or output‐only methods are used. This paper describes a comparison between ambient and FVTs carried out on a two‐story building. Results from both testing methods are compared and discussed in order to assess the vibration properties estimates obtained with the frequency domain decomposition technique. Copyright © 2007 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.249 · 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