Experimental and analytical fragility assessment of a combined heavy timber–steel‐braced frame through hybrid simulation
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
Summary A combined heavy timber–steel structural system has recently been developed for the adaptation of advanced structural braces into tall timber structures. This study investigates the system‐level performance of a seven‐story combined timber–steel friction‐braced frame using hybrid simulation and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). The IDA results from the hybrid simulations are compared with a numerical model to assess its ability to capture the nonlinear seismic performance of the timber–steel friction‐braced frame. Experimental and numerical IDA results are used to derive fragility curves for interstory and residual drift and assess its collapse probability under different earthquake hazard levels. The hybrid test results show that the timber–steel friction‐braced frame demonstrates excellent seismic performance under a range of ground motion intensities. The experimental results from the hybrid simulations and the experimental fragility curves correlate well with the numerical modeling results.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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