Evaluation of the seismic response coefficient introduced in the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes results from an evaluation study of the elastic seismic response coefficient introduced in the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code. The evaluation is conducted by comparing the seismic response coefficient with (i) uniform hazard spectra for selected cities in eastern and western Canada, (ii) spectra of numerically simulated ground motions for sites in British Columbia for scenario earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction zone, (iii) spectra of the 1988 Saguenay, Quebec, earthquake records and selected ensembles of recorded accelerograms from strong earthquakes around the world, and (iv) bridge design spectra of other countries. The results from this study show that the seismic response coefficient of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code is conservative in terms of the Canadian seismic hazard, with the exception of (i) sites close to the Cascadia subduction zone and (ii) sites for which the seismic hazard is governed by the effects of strong earthquakes at large epicentral distances. Key words: seismic, response, coefficient, acceleration, spectra, bridge, design, code.
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 | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".