Combination rule for the prediction of the seismic demand on columns of regular bridges under bidirectional earthquake components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A percentage rule for the prediction of interacting seismic responses of bridge columns under multi-directional earthquake components is derived for eastern and western Canada seismic regions. A total of 14 regular bridges with different geometrical properties were examined for the two sites. The new rule was developed by comparing the column longitudinal steel ratio required from response spectrum analysis with combination rules to the ratio determined from the results of linear dynamic time history analysis of the bridge structures under bidirectional ground motions. The required steel ratios were found to vary with the weighted percentages used in the combination rules, the ground motion characteristics, and bridge properties. It was found that a 100%–20% combination rule is applicable for most bridges studied in eastern Canada. A 100%–40% rule is more appropriate for bridges located in western Canada. The results show that these rules need not be applied for regular straight bridges without skew but further investigation is needed before such a relaxation can be applied. Nonlinear dynamic time histories analysis of a two-span skewed bridge designed with the proposed percentage rule for eastern and western Canada showed that the columns would not experience excessive damage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".