Generation of floor accelerations for seismic testing of operational and functional building components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to establish floor accelerations to be used for shake table testing of operational and functional components that are sensitive mainly to horizontal accelerations. For this purpose, two different ensembles of floor accelerations were generated from nonlinear time–history dynamic analyses of three- and six-storey building models incorporating ductile reinforced concrete cantilevered walls. The first ensemble was generated based on synthetic ground motions representative of the intraplate regions of eastern Canada, and the second ensemble was generated from synthetic ground motions representative of the crustal and subcrustal earthquakes of western Canada. The ground motions were selected based on the deaggregations of the seismic hazard for each region in terms of most likely magnitude – epicentral distance scenarios. The building models were designed in accordance with the current seismic provisions of the National Building Code of Canada applicable for each region. Application of the resulting floor accelerations in shake table testing of free-standing bookcases and interior partition walls is reported in a companion paper.Key words: floor accelerations, ground motions, nonlinear dynamic analyses, nonstructural, operational and functional 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".