MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312534520 · doi:10.1061/41084(364)74

Nonlinear Performance Based Seismic Assessment for Low-Rise Buildings

2009· article· en· W2312534520 on OpenAlexaff
Robert D. Hanson, Graham Taylor, Carlos E. Ventura, Freddy Pina

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCalifornia Institute of Technology
KeywordsChristian ministryEngineeringBridging (networking)Civil engineeringLow-riseConstruction engineeringComputer sciencePolitical scienceLawComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In May 2004 the Ministry of Education of British Columbia (Ministry) announced a $1.5 billion seismic mitigation program for public K-12 school buildings. The goal of this program is to achieve the seismic mitigation of the most hazardous school buildings within a reasonable length of time. The development of innovative, cost effective assessment and mitigation design is being prepared under contract with the Ministry through a cooperative agreement between the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia (APEGBC) and the Department of Civil Engineering of the University of British Columbia (UBC). The unique approach to develop a new cost effective seismic mitigation program within a reasonable period of time is a real challenge. The basic concepts of the approach and preliminary data were generated and released to the design community in November 2006. Internally this document is referred to as the Bridging Guidelines. However, the official title of the copyrighted document is Performance-Based Seismic Assessments and Retrofit Design Concepts — Second Edition. In March 2007 the Ministry announced the availability of $254 million in funding for capital construction. The Ministry required that the funds for this program be utilized for the assessment and structural seismic retrofit designs of the school buildings. Non-structural seismic mitigation was in a separate program. APEGBC and UBC are continuing the program development. The concepts and ideas given herein are a combination of those released in November 2006 and more recent developments. This paper is intended to be consistent with the new, significantly improved version of the program. However, as new concepts continue to be developed this paper cannot assure the reader that what is presented will be the final approved program.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207