MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314151663 · doi:10.1061/9780784479728.028

Design Decision Support for Steel Frame Buildings through an Earthquake-Induced Loss Assessment

2015· article· en· W2314151663 on OpenAlexaff
Seong‐Hoon Hwang, Ahmed Elkady, Dimitrios G. Lignos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Frame (networking)Computer sciencePortfolioArchetypeEarthquake engineeringSeismic analysisStructural engineeringEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, there is an increasing need to quantify earthquake-induced losses throughout the expected life of a building in order to evaluate alternative design options such that we can minimize repairs in the aftermath of an earthquake. This paper discusses an analytical study that quantifies the expected economic losses in a portfolio of archetype steel frame buildings designed with perimeter special moment frames or special concentrically braced frames in urban California in accordance with current seismic provisions in the U.S. The expected economic losses associated with repair are computed based on an established loss estimation framework within the context of performance-based earthquake engineering. It is shown that repair costs in the aftermath of earthquakes vary significantly depending on the employed lateral load-resisting system, seismic design considerations as well as the analytical model representation of the archetype frame building itself.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207