MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027801351 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2011-0052

Assessment of seismic vulnerability of typical Quebec city bridges considering the site-specific amplification effects

2013· article· en· W2027801351 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Bertrand Galy, Amar Khaled, Marie‐José Nollet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersÉcole de technologie supérieure
KeywordsVulnerability assessmentVulnerability (computing)Seismic riskSeismologyForensic engineeringEngineeringCivil engineeringGeologyEnvironmental scienceGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the seismic performance of 1970s regular R/C bridge is investigated in terms of ductility demand, considering site-specific time histories and the amplification effect of soil with heterogeneous stratigraphy. The five seismic site classes of the 2005 National Building Code of Canada were used in this study and seismic site analyses were performed on soil columns representing real stratigraphies of typical Quebec City soil profiles. A total of 24 linear modal dynamic analyses and 24 nonlinear time-history analyses were performed using historical earthquakes representative of Eastern Canada. It was found that the bridge model shows yielding at the base of the columns for site classes C, D, and E. For site classes D and E the 2005 NBCC amplification factors were found to underestimate the amplification effect on the bridge's response. These results also show that the energy dissipation is a better indicator of damages than the permanent displacement.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207