MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464279077 · doi:10.3390/s16071016

Field Measurement-Based System Identification and Dynamic Response Prediction of a Unique MIT Building

2016· article· en· W2464279077 on OpenAlexaff
Young‐Jin Cha, Peter Trocha, Oral Büyüköztürk

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyShell
KeywordsAccelerometerNatural frequencyStructural engineeringAccelerationField (mathematics)VibrationAmbient vibrationEngineeringStructural systemFoundation (evidence)Computer scienceAcousticsPhysicsGeographyFinite element methodMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tall buildings are ubiquitous in major cities and house the homes and workplaces of many individuals. However, relatively few studies have been carried out to study the dynamic characteristics of tall buildings based on field measurements. In this paper, the dynamic behavior of the Green Building, a unique 21-story tall structure located on the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA), was characterized and modeled as a simplified lumped-mass beam model (SLMM), using data from a network of accelerometers. The accelerometer network was used to record structural responses due to ambient vibrations, blast loading, and the October 16th 2012 earthquake near Hollis Center (ME, USA). Spectral and signal coherence analysis of the collected data was used to identify natural frequencies, modes, foundation rocking behavior, and structural asymmetries. A relation between foundation rocking and structural natural frequencies was also found. Natural frequencies and structural acceleration from the field measurements were compared with those predicted by the SLMM which was updated by inverse solving based on advanced multiobjective optimization methods using the measured structural responses and found to have good agreement.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207