Comparison of the Performance Point Determination Approaches Proposed in TEC2007 and FEMA440
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mevcut betonarme yap sistemlerinin performansa dayal hesabnda, kapasite ve istem erilerinin kesitirilmesi ile elde edilen performans noktasnn belirlenmesi iin farkl yaklamlar bulunmaktadr. Deprem Blgelerinde Yaplacak Binalar Hakknda Ynetmelik (DBYBHY2007) de, TB'den daha uzun peryotlu yaplar iin eit yerdeitirme prensibine dayal bir yntem izlenirken, FEMA440 da efektif periyot ve snm tanmlarna dayal bir ardk yaklam yntemi nerilmektedir. Bu almada, dzenli betonarme yap sistemlerini temsil edecek ekilde seilen, farkl kat saylarna sahip ereve ve perde-ereve tr tayc sistemi olan binalar zerinde allmtr. Bu binalar iin DBYBHY2007 ve FEMA440 da tanmlanan performans noktas belirleme yaklamlar kullanlarak elde edilen deprem istemleri, birbirleriyle ve "kesin zm" olarak kabul edilen Zaman Tanm Alannda Dorusal Olmayan Analiz (ZTADOA) ile bulunan deprem istemleriyle karlatrlmtr. Bu istemler arasnda tepe yerdeitirmesi, taban kesme kuvveti, greli kat telemeleri bulunmaktadr. ncelenen sistemlerde, DBYBHY2007 ile belirlenen istemlerin "kesin zm" olarak kabul edilen ZTADOA sonularna daha yakn olduu gzlenmitir
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".