MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2084024708 · doi:10.1061/9780784413067.127

Post-Earthquake Repair and Improvements, San Vicente, Chile

2013· article· en· W2084024708 on OpenAlexaff
John Bardi, Jyotirmoy Sircar, J. Paul Smith-Pardo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsBerger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWharfPierPileSeismic retrofitEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeologyStructural engineeringCivil engineeringReinforced concrete

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The magnitude 8.8 earthquake of February 2010 in Chile dealt a heavy blow to the 600-meter (2,000-ft) wharf structure at Berths 1, 2, and 3 of the San Vicente Terminal Internacional in the Biobio region of Chile. Earthquake-induced liquefaction and lateral spreading in the upland fill and wharf slope resulted in permanent wharf lateral deflections in excess of 600 mm (24 in), along with associated damage to concrete piling and pile-to-cap connections. This paper presents the post-earthquake repair and rehabilitation program for the wharf structure. The proposed rehabilitation strategy consisted of two phases: first, a structural assessment of the post-earthquake conditions with recommendations for short-term repairs and restrictions on operating criteria, followed by a structural retrofit program designed to stiffen the existing structure and provide a new lateral-force resisting system. An innovative approach to the seismic retrofit was used, which incorporates a combination of new plumb piles behind the wharf with ground improvement to ensure ample lateral strength and ductility capacity of the structure. The wharf retrofit also included a new apron structure in front of the wharf, designed to improve the local stability of existing slender piling (impacted by P-delta effects), with the added benefit of providing support for future crane rail installation and increased dredge depth. Finally, a 200-meter (656-ft) finger pier extension was included in the program, bringing the structurally retrofitted 4-berth system to a total combined 800 meters in length, designed to the most current seismic design standards.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics→French-language works237,207→