MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039102749 · doi:10.1139/l02-069

Proposed Canadian code provisions for seismic design of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment

2003· article· en· W2039102749 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
W E McKevitt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)Seismic analysisEarthquake shaking tableEngineeringKey (lock)Structural engineeringCode (set theory)Differential (mechanical device)Table (database)Building codeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proposed code provisions for the seismic design of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment are presented. In these provisions a new format is introduced which gives a consistent treatment for all elements and components, architectural, mechanical, and electrical. For the first time, soil effects are included in the provisions, which also seek to ensure that designers consider the interrelationship of the nonstructural components and differential displacements within the building structure. The proposed force equation is based on a uniform hazard spectrum approach with force modification factors. Specified force levels are based on data from instrumented buildings recorded during recent earthquakes. Updated requirements for connection design specify forces that are consistent with component design forces. New element and component categories are provided in an expanded table of elements of structures, nonstructural components, and equipment. To assess the impact of the proposed provisions on component design at various locations across the country, calculations are presented for typical multistorey buildings in a number of Canadian cities.Key words: seismic design, elements of structures, nonstructural mechanical electrical architectural components.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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