MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2179419111 · doi:10.1193/122912eqs361m

Local Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Structures as a Strategy for Seismic Risk Mitigation at Regional Scale

2014· article· en· W2179419111 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Spectra · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsCouncil of Ministers of Education
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforced concreteVulnerability (computing)Work (physics)Seismic retrofitUpgradeCivil engineeringFibre-reinforced plasticScale (ratio)Seismic riskEarthquake scenarioUrban seismic riskEngineeringForensic engineeringStructural engineeringSeismic hazardComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent earthquakes have clearly shown the high vulnerability of existing reinforced concrete (RC) structures. There is a crucial need to find cost‐effective and efficient strategies and methods to strengthen a large number of buildings (i.e., at a regional scale) before future major earthquakes occur. A viable strategy to prevent potential damage caused by earthquakes could be to selectively upgrade local capacity of individual structural components. In the aftermath of the 6 April 2009 L'Aquila earthquake, local retrofit work based on the use of fiber polymer reinforcement (FRP) were executed to increase the seismic capacity of lightly damaged public and private buildings. According to theoretical analyses carried out on six reinforced concrete (RC) school buildings in L'Aquila, a seismic safety level of about 60% of that requested in the design of a new building can be achieved in most cases by FRP‐based strengthening of exterior joints.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.365
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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