MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089870786 · doi:10.1002/eqe.3353

Seismic performance assessment of a multispan continuous isolated highway bridge with superelastic shape memory alloy reinforced piers and restraining devices

2020· article· en· W3089870786 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, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSMA*Structural engineeringPierBridge (graph theory)Shape-memory alloyRebarBeam bridgeSpan (engineering)Plastic hingeDeformation (meteorology)EngineeringHingeMaterials scienceComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study is to analytically determine the effectiveness of a novel bridge system with superelastic (SE) shape memory alloy (SMA) reinforced concrete piers. The bridge is also equipped with SE SMA cable restrainers to prevent the bridge spans from a large displacement that can potentially cause span unseating. In the concrete bridge piers, the conventional steel reinforcements in the plastic hinge regions are replaced with SE SMA rebar to avoid large plastic deformation and improve its self‐centering capacity. A typical three‐span continuous highway bridge is modeled with SMA‐reinforced piers and SMA restrainers. Numerical simulations of the bridge are conducted under destructive near‐fault ground motions. The seismic responses and fragility curves of the novel bridge (Bridge IV) are assessed and compared with the reference bridge (Bridge I), the bridge with only SMA‐reinforced piers (Bridge II), and the bridge with only SMA restrainers (Bridge III). The results revealed that the SMA‐reinforced pier can successfully reduce the residual deformation and damage probability of the bridge; however, the bridge with only SMA‐reinforced piers is less efficient in preventing a large displacement. The use of SMA restrainers can efficiently limit the displacement of the bridge spans but increase the damage probability of the bridge piers. The proposed novel bridge having SMA‐reinforced piers equipped with SMA restrainers (Bridge IV) is more efficient than the bridge with only SMA‐reinforced piers (Bridge II)) or the bridge with only SMA restrainers (Bridge III).

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 score0.382
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 head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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