MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520542319 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2015-0427

Improvements to the simplified analysis method for the design of seismically isolated bridges in CSA-S6-14

2016· article· en· W2520542319 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Viacheslav Koval, Constantin Christopoulos, Robert Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of TorontoMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringBridge (graph theory)LinearizationSeismic analysisDissipationNonlinear systemCode (set theory)Range (aeronautics)Damping ratioEngineeringDisplacement (psychology)Function (biology)Computer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design provisions for seismically isolated bridges in the CAN/CSA-S6 Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code and the AASHTO Guide Specifications for Seismic Isolation Design ( AASHTO 2010 , 2014 ) have been developed primarily based on ground motions recorded along the west coast of North America. Both codes include a simplified analysis procedure that relies on an equivalent effective linearization of the nonlinear isolated structure together with damping coefficients to account for the effect of energy dissipation on the response of the isolated system. The appropriateness and range of application of code-specified simplified methods were investigated through nonlinear time-history analyses to propose improvements to this procedure for the new edition of the CSA-S6-2014 code. Based on these analyses, new damping coefficients are proposed for Eastern North America (ENA) and new limits for the application of the simplified method are defined. For ENA, the method with newly proposed damping coefficients can give good bridge displacement estimates for equivalent damping ratios of up to 40%, which broadens the possible designs that can be achieved using the simplified method. This study also showed that applicability limits could be defined more accurately as a function of the system properties.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207