MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113139930 · doi:10.1193/022213eqs047m

Seismic Performance of a Six‐Story Reinforced Concrete Masonry Building during the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence

2013· article· en· W2113139930 on OpenAlexaff
José A. Centeno, Carlos E. Ventura, Jason Ingham

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Spectra · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Hazards Research PlatformWashington State University
KeywordsMasonryStructural engineeringUnreinforced masonry buildingGeotechnical engineeringSeismic loadingGeologyReinforced concreteProgressive collapseEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the Christchurch earthquake of February 2011, several midrise reinforced concrete masonry (RCM) buildings showed performance levels that fall in the range of life safety to near collapse. A case study of one of these buildings, a six‐story RCM building deemed to have reached the near collapse performance level, is presented in this paper. The RCM walls on the second floor failed due to toe crushing, reducing the building's lateral resistance in the east–west direction. A three‐dimensional (3‐D) nonlinear dynamic analysis was conducted to simulate the development of the governing failure mechanism. Analysis results showed that the walls that were damaged were subjected to large compression loads during the earthquake, which caused an increase in their in‐plane lateral strength but reduced their ductility capacity. After toe crushing failure, axial instability of the model was prevented by a redistribution of gravity loads.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthquake SpectraSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207