MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2386218080

Effect of Soft Soil Layer on Ground Motion Peak

2013· article· en· W2386218080 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

VenueJournal of Seismological Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCivil and Geotechnical Engineering Research
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVibrationGround motionAccelerationPeak ground accelerationIntensity (physics)GeologyReduction (mathematics)Geotechnical engineeringSeismologyPhysicsAcousticsOpticsGeometryMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Basing on a soft site in Jianghuai region,we constructed several analyze models of site soil seismic response. Then we selected three earthquake records of Taft (1952N21E) ,Kobe ( 1995EW ) and E1-Centro ( 1940NS ) as the input waves,and analyzed the effect of the buried depth and the thickness of soft soil layer on ground peak acceleration in frequency domain through one-dimension equivalent linear fluctuation method. The results showed that for the given input ground motion,the ground acceleration peak and soil amplification factors decreased gradually with the increase of thickness or buried depth of soft site. When the thickness or buried depth of soft site exceeded a certain value,the soft site began to show vibration reduction effect,the deeper and the thicker of the soft layer,the higher intensity of input ground motion,the vibration reduction effect is more obvious.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.291 · 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