MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046736167 · doi:10.1002/eqe.3325

Estimating economic losses of midrise reinforced concrete shear wall buildings in sedimentary basins by combining empirical and simulated seismic hazard characterizations

2020· article· en· W3046736167 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

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSeismic hazardSubductionGeologySeismologySedimentary basinStructural basinHazardSeismic riskTectonicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Studies of recorded ground motions and simulations have shown that deep sedimentary basins can greatly increase the intensity of earthquake ground motions within a period range of approximately 1–4 s, but the economic impacts of basin effects are uncertain. This paper estimates key economic indicators of seismic performance, expressed in terms of earthquake‐induced repair costs, using empirical and simulated seismic hazard characterizations that account for the effects of basins. The methodology used is general, but the estimates are made for a series of eight‐ to 24‐story residential reinforced concrete shear wall archetype buildings in Seattle, WA, whose design neglects basin effects. All buildings are designed to comply with code‐minimum requirements (i.e., reference archetypes), as well as a series of design enhancements, which include (a) increasing design forces, (b) decreasing drift limits, and (c) a combination of these strategies. As an additional reference point, a performance‐based design is also assessed. The performance of the archetype buildings is evaluated for the seismic hazard level in Seattle according to the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model (2018 NSHM), which explicitly considers basin effects. Inclusion of basin effects results in an average threefold increase in annualized losses for all archetypes. Incorporating physics‐based ground motion simulations to represent the large‐magnitude Cascadia subduction interface earthquake contribution to the hazard results in a further increase of 22% relative to the 2018 NSHM. The most effective of the design strategies considered combines a 25% increase in strength with a reduction in drift limits to 1.5%.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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