Performance-Based Retrofit of School Buildings in British Columbia, Canada: An Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2004, the Province of British Columbia (B.C.) announced a 10–15 year, $1.5 billion seismic retrofit program for the province’s 750 at-risk public schools. The purpose of this program is to quantify the seismic risk of the provinces school buildings and to expedite the seismic upgrading of the most at-risk schools. In order to provide a safe and cost effective implementation of this program, the Association of Professional Engineers of British Columbia (APEGBC), in collaboration with the University of British Columbia (UBC), has developed a performance-based probabilistic method and guidelines for the seismic risk assessment and retrofit of low-rise buildings. The guidelines: the Seismic Retrofit Guidelines, (SRG), are currently moving towards their 3rd edition, to be published in 2016. This paper summarizes the current state of the province-wide retrofit program and introduces the performance based methodology that has been used to assess and retrofit school blocks. Some of the methodology changes that will be implemented in SRG3 are also introduced. These changes include revisions to the seismic hazard, a new ground motion selection and scaling procedure, and new retrofit prototypes and modeling approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".