Fragility Analysis of a Continuous Gird Bridge Subjected to a Mainshock-Aftershock Sequence Considering Deterioration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field evidence from recent earthquake indicates that strong aftershocks have the potential to cause severe damage or even collapse to structures. This paper aims to investigate the influence of aftershock on the seismic performance assessing results of bridge considering cumulative damage effect. For that purpose, a damage evaluating approach for continuous girder bridge is employed that includes two integral parts: deteriorating numerical modeling and a combined damage index that considers both large deformation and cyclic loading effects. To investigate the influence of aftershock, a continuous girder RC bridge was selected and nonlinear incremental dynamical analysis subjected to mainshocks and mainshock-aftershock sequences was conducted. The fragility curves were finally generated. Comparisons were also made to investigate the difference of the result due to whether the cumulative damage is considered or not. From the analysis results, it was found that, for continuous bridges, aftershocks can considerably increase the seismic demand as well as fragility. In addition, for moderate damage fragility, the influence of aftershock is greater when cumulative damage is considered.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".