MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163138412 · doi:10.1139/l08-029

Review of post-earthquake fire hazard to building structures

2008· article· en· W2163138412 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsHazardFire protection engineeringFire protectionFire hazardSeismic hazardEngineeringHazard analysisStructural systemForensic engineeringCivil engineeringConstruction engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceArchitectural engineeringEnvironmental scienceReliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fire following an earthquake is an important factor causing damage to buildings and life-line structures. Therefore, besides satisfying structural design requirements for normal loads, such as dead and live loads including the seismic hazard, buildings should also be designed to withstand the fire following earthquakes for a certain minimum duration as required for a desired level of performance. This period of time will allow occupants to evacuate the building safely and the emergency crews to cope with the fire. Also, it is essential to reduce the post-earthquake fire (PEF) ignitions and minimize the damage to active fire protection systems as much as possible to prevent the spread of fire. This paper presents a state-of-the-art review on the PEF hazard and discusses the causes, mitigation measures, and performance of building structures under this hazard. Mitigation measures that could be developed based on the experience from the structural engineering field are identified. Both local and global approaches that should be taken to mitigate the PEF hazard, including structural and nonstructural design, various urban planning aspects, and their interactive combinations, are discussed. Based on the review, it is concluded that that there is a strong need for the development of guidelines for structural fire safety design for PEF scenarios. In addition, appropriate analysis and numerical simulation techniques for the evaluation of the structural performance under earthquake-induced fire conditions need to be developed. It is also necessary to conduct experimental studies to validate such numerical models and refine them.

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)0.001
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 score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.187 · 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