MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

System-Level Seismic Performance Assessment of an Asymmetrical Reinforced Concrete Block Shear Wall Building

2015· article· en· W1987034010 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

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsStructural engineeringShear wallDuctility (Earth science)Rigidity (electromagnetism)Reinforced concreteStructural systemEccentricity (behavior)Seismic analysisMaterials scienceEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringCreepComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a two-story reinforced concrete block scaled building was tested to failure under fully reversed quasi-static displacement-controlled loading. The building’s seismic force-resisting system (SFRS) consisted of eight structural walls in total, with four walls, aligned along the loading direction, placed asymmetrically to result in a center of rigidity eccentricity from the floor center of mass of approximately 20% of the building width, evaluated on the basis of elastic analysis. The other four orthogonal walls were placed symmetrically around the building floor center of mass to provide torsional restraints to the building. As such, the focus of the paper is on evaluating the influence of twist as a system-level aspect on the ductility capacity of the building and the ductility and strength demands of its wall components. This paper presents the details of the building SFRS and wall configurations and characteristics and the main test observations and results. This is followed by analyses of the experimental results that showed that, at the system level, each wall would be subjected to significantly different displacement/strength demands throughout the building’s loading history. These different demand levels are functions of the interaction between the system-level twist response and the resulting displacement demands imposed on each wall component and the subsequent load redistribution following different component damage. The study showed that the variation in the inelastic response characteristics of the different walls comprising the building’s SFRS and wall strength contributions to the overall building capacity and the subsequently mobilized ductility levels are all factors that should be considered when evaluating the overall building SFRS performance.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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