MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055465780 · doi:10.1139/l07-002

Reliability-based optimal design software for earthquake engineering applications

2007· article· en· W2055465780 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Liang, Terje Haukaas, Johannes Ø. Røyset

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenSeesFinite element methodMaintainabilityComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Flexibility (engineering)SoftwareSearch-based software engineeringReliability engineeringNonlinear systemEngineeringStructural engineeringSoftware designSoftware development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a functional tool for engineers to make rational design decisions by balancing cost and safety. Focus is on seismic design, in which nonlinear structural response must be considered. For this purpose, we implement and apply a state-of-the-art algorithm for reliability-based design optimization. The work extends the OpenSees software, which is rapidly gaining users in the earthquake engineering community. Consequently, design optimization with sophisticated nonlinear finite element models of real structures is possible. An object-oriented software architecture is employed that focuses on maintainability and extensibility of the software. This approach also offers flexibility in the choice of optimization and reliability methods for each specific problem, supported by the decoupled nature of the optimization algorithm. Our work utilizes and extends the existing tools for structural reliability analysis in OpenSees. In particular, we employ response sensitivities that are computed within the finite element code by direct differentiation. The implementation is tested through case studies with nonlinear structural response. Discontinuous response gradients are overcome by use of fibre cross sections and smoothed material models. The numerical examples include the seismic design optimization of a six-storey, three-bay, reinforced concrete building. Key words: reliability-based design optimization, nonlinear finite elements, earthquake engineering, object-oriented software development, OpenSees.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207