MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056513338 · doi:10.1007/bf02823928

Seismic fragility analysis of a CANDU type NPP containment building for near-fault ground motions

2006· article· en· W2056513338 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
In-Kil Choi, Young-Sun Choun, Seong-Moon Ahn, Jeong-Moon Seo

Bibliographic record

VenueKSCE Journal of Civil Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragilityNonlinear systemContainment (computer programming)GeologyContainment buildingSeismologyShear (geology)Fault (geology)Structural engineeringEngineeringPhysicsNuclear engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the seismic fragility of a CANDU (CANada Deuterium Uranium) containment building is estimated by performing the nonlinear seismic analysis for the near-fault earthquakes. The lumped mass model of the containment building was used for a nonlinear dynamic time history analysis. The tri-linear skeleton curve was used for the nonlinear behavior of the prestressed concrete containment building. In order to estimate the inelastic nonlinear response of the containment, the maximum point oriented model was used for the hysteretic rule of the shear deformation. For the nonlinear seismic analyses, 30 set of real near-fault earthquake records were used as the input motion. The seismic responses and seismic fragility of the containment for the near-fault ground motions are compared with the responses and fragility for the design ground motion generally used in Korea.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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