MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021422611 · doi:10.2478/ceer-2020-0008

Reliability-Based Safety Evaluation of the BISTOON Historic Masonry Arch Bridge

2020· article· en· W3021422611 on OpenAlex
Majid Pouraminian, Somayyeh Pourbakhshian, Ehsan Noroozinejad Farsangi, Sevil Berenji, Salman Keyani Borujeni, Mirhasan Moosavi Asl, Mehdi Mohammad Hosseini

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

VenueCivil And Environmental Engineering Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringLatin hypercube samplingRandom variableMathematicsEngineeringSensitivity (control systems)Monte Carlo methodStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the probabilistic safety assessment of the historic BISTOON arch bridge. Probabilistic analysis based on the Load-Resistance model was performed. The evaluation of implicit functions of load and resistance was performed by the finite element method, and the Monte-Carlo approach was used for experiment simulation. The sampling method used was Latin Hypercube. Four random variables were considered including modulus of elasticity of brick and infilled materials and the specific mass of brick and infilled materials. The normal distribution was used to express the statistical properties of the random variables. The coefficient of variation was defined as 10%. Linear behavior was assumed for the bridge materials. Three output parameters of maximum bridge displacement, maximum tensile stress, and minimum compressive stress were assigned as structural limit states. A sensitivity analysis for probabilistic analysis was performed using the Spearman ranking method. The results showed that the sensitivity of output parameters to infilled density changes is high. The results also indicated that the system probability of failure is equal to <i>p f system</i> =1.55 × 10<sup>−3</sup>. The bridge safety index value obtained is <i>β</i><i>t</i> = 2.96, which is lower than the recommended target safety index. The required safety parameters for the bridge have not been met and the bridge is at the risk of failure.

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 score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.167 · 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