SEISMIC RETROFIT OF NONDUCTILE REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAME AND MASONRY BUILDINGS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large proportion of existing building and bridge infrastructure across the world consists of seismically deficient non-ductile structural systems. Performance of structures during recent earthquakes have demonstrated seismic vulnerability of these systems, the majority of which were designed prior to the enactment of modern seismic codes, though some were designed more recently in areas where code enforcement provides challenges. These structures constitute considerable seismic risk, especially in large metropolitan centres. Because it is economically not feasible to replace a large segment of seismically deficient infrastructure with new and improved systems, retrofitting existing structures remains to be a viable seismic risk mitigation strategy. The objective of this paper is to highlight seismic retrofit strategies for deficient building and bridge infrastructures, with emphasis on experimental and analytical research conducted at the University of Ottawa. The retrofit strategies consist of structural upgrades at the system level, as well as at the element level. Non-ductile reinforced concrete frame retrofits, in the form of lateral bracing techniques, and concrete column and masonry wall retrofit methodologies are discussed. The use of innovative materials and techniques are presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it