MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122885490 · doi:10.1002/eqe.2374

Application of hybrid‐simulation to fragility assessment of the telescoping self‐centering energy dissipative bracing system

2013· article· en· W2122885490 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsFragilityTelescoping seriesStructural engineeringBracingSubstructureDissipative systemEngineeringHybrid systemComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Substructure hybrid simulation has been the subject of numerous investigations in recent years. The simulation method allows for the assessment of the seismic performance of structures by representing critical components with physical specimens and the rest of the structure with numerical models. In this study the system level performance of a six‐storey structure with telescoping self‐centering energy dissipative (T‐SCED) braces is validated through pseudo‐dynamic (PsD) hybrid simulation. Fragility curves are derived for the T‐SCED system. This paper presents the configuration of the hybrid simulation, the newly developed control software for PsD hybrid simulation, which can integrate generic hydraulic actuators into PsD hybrid simulation, and the seismic performance of a structure equipped with T‐SCED braces. The experimental results show that the six‐storey structure with T‐SCED braces satisfies performance limits specified in ASCE 41. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.198 · 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