Fourth-generation seismic hazard maps for the 2005 national building code of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Geological Survey of Canada's new seismic hazard model for Canada will form the basis for the seismic design provisions of the 2005 National Building Code of Canada (NBCC). As such it represents Canada's fourth generation of seismic hazard maps (previous ones were in 1953, 1970, and 1985). The Cornell-McGuire method is used with two complete earthquake source models - historical and regional/geological - to represent the uncertainty in where (and why) earthquakes will happen in the future. Ground motions for a deterministic Cascadia subduction earthquake are computed for southwestern Canada, and probabilistic seismic hazard for the nearly aseismic central part of Canada is assessed based on a global model. A 'robust' method is used to combine the probabilistic hazard estimates (at a probability of 2%/50 years or 0.000404 p.a.) from the four source models: the mapped value is the largest of the values. Products will include seismic hazard maps, tabulated values, uniform hazard spectra (UHS), plots of deaggregated hazard and documentation. For the seismic provisions of the 2005 National Building Code of Canada the median ground motion on firm soil sites for spectral acceleration at periods of 0.2, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 seconds and peak acceleration will be used. The four spectral parameters will allow the construction of approximate UHS for each locality, and hence improve earthquake-resistant design.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
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".