MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035377600 · doi:10.1080/13632460701512399

Estimating the Higher-Mode Response of Ductile Structures

2008· article· en· W2035377600 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Earthquake Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsModalStructural engineeringMode (computer interface)Nonlinear systemModal analysisFrame (networking)Shear wallWork (physics)Modal testingReinforced concreteEngineeringComputer scienceFinite element methodMaterials sciencePhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the importance of higher-mode actions is appreciated within the engineering community, the affect that ductile nonlinear response has on higher-mode characteristics and the subsequent implications this has for design has received little attention. In this article, the manner in which the higher-mode response of frame-wall structures is affected by inelastic behavior is closely examined and a means of accounting for this in design is proposed. The work focuses firstly on the characteristics of the higher modes present at the development of peak response and then considers how these characteristics would affect the total forces in the building. The study utilizes a series of nonlinear time-history analyses of two different groups of RC frame-wall structures subject to a suite of real records. It is shown that a new modal analysis approach that incorporates transitory inelastic modal characteristics gives significantly improved predictions of peak base shear in frame-wall structures than more traditional modal analysis methods which use elastic higher-mode characteristics. The issues associated with the use of transitory inelastic modal characteristics are discussed and various challenges that would need addressing for the prediction of other response parameters and structural types are identified.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.251 · 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