MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106812667 · doi:10.1139/l04-099

Regional seismic risk in British Columbia — classification of buildings and development of damage probability functions

2005· article· en· W2106812667 on OpenAlex
Carlos E. Ventura, W. D. Liam Finn, Tuna Onur, Ardel Blanquera, Mahmoud Rezai

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Probability distributionSeismic riskComputer scienceCivil engineeringEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regional seismic risk estimations are needed in southwestern British Columbia, since it is one of the most seismically active and highly populated regions in Canada. Regional estimations typically involve a large number of buildings, which makes it necessary to establish a building classification system, where the average response to earthquake shaking is assumed to be similar within each building class. In this study, buildings in British Columbia were divided into 31 classes based on their material, lateral load bearing system, height, use, and age. A damage probability matrix (DPM) was then developed for each building class which describes the probability of being in a certain damage level (i.e., light, moderate, heavy, etc.) given the ground shaking intensity. Next, a probability distribution function was fit to the discrete probability values at each intensity level. The products of this study, the building classification system, the DPMs, and the probability distribution functions will allow regional damage and loss estimations in the area.Key words: seismic risk, vulnerability, building classification, structural system, building response, damage, probability.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.164 · 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