MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Performance-Based Analysis in Civil Engineering: Overview of Applications

2019· article· en· W2946113517 on OpenAlexafffund
Said M. Easa, Wai Yeung Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueInfrastructures · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEngineering design processCivil engineeringEngineeringBridge (graph theory)Construction engineeringComputer scienceSystems engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional design approaches in civil engineering mainly focus on codes/guidelines related to building an infrastructure, while performance-based analysis (PBA), an emerging new reality around the world, focuses on the performance of the end product. Professional organizations, academicians, and the industry have made significant contributions in formulating PBA in various civil engineering fields, where practical guidelines and principles have been adopted in infrastructure analysis. This paper presents a critical review of PBA applications in three civil engineering fields: transportation, environmental, and structural engineering. The applications are grouped into a wide array of civil engineering areas, including highway transportation, pavement design and management, air transportation, water-structures design and operation, landfill design, building architectural design for evacuation, urban energy design, building earthquake-based design, building wind-based design, and bridge design and management. A total of 187 publications on PBA were reviewed and details on 122 application papers (from 23 countries/regions) are presented. The review consists of vertical and horizontal scans of PBA applications. In the vertical scan, the applications in each civil engineering area are summarized in tabular format that shows the system element modeled, analysis objective, performance criteria, analytical tool, and specifications/codes. The horizontal scan (discussion and lessons learned) addresses the following aspects of PBA: (1) the wide array of analytical tools used, (2) the broad functional and process-related areas, (3) the advantages, challenges, and opportunities, and (4) potential future applications. It is hoped that the state-of-the-art review presented in this paper will help researchers/practitioners quickly find useful information about PBA and promote its development in their respective fields.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfrastructuresSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207