MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896059470 · doi:10.1142/s179343111850015x

Seismic Performance of the Buckling-Restrained Brace Central Buckle for Long-Span Suspension Bridges

2018· article· en· W2896059470 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 Earthquake and Tsunami · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersTongji UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBuckleStructural engineeringBucklingSuspension (topology)BraceSpan (engineering)DamperGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel central buckle composed of buckling-restrained braces (BRBs) is developed for long-span suspension bridges, and its preliminary design procedure is presented. Seismic performance of suspension bridges equipped with BRB central buckles is investigated and compared with those with conventional central buckles (e.g. rigid or flexible central buckles). Furthermore, the effect of BRB yield force, as well as the effectiveness of BRB central buckles combined with viscous dampers, is evaluated using parametric analyses. The results indicate that the BRB central buckle is more effective than other central buckles in reducing both the longitudinal girder displacements and force demands on towers during an earthquake. Furthermore, the combination of BRB central buckles and viscous dampers is a superior option for mitigating the seismic response of long-span suspension bridges.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.202 · 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