Interstory drift ratio associated with performance objectives for shallow‐buried multistory and span subway stations in inhomogeneous soil profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The interstory drift ratios (IDRs) associated with the performance objectives for the underground structure are not well defined. In this paper, four levels of performance objectives are defined for shallow‐buried subway station structure: operational, immediate occupancy, life safety, and collapse prevention. In order to develop IDRs corresponding to these performance objectives, 18 subway station structures were selected for this study. Pushover analyses were conducted using three‐dimensional finite‐element models considering two conditions of seismic loading: vertical and horizontal ground motions; and horizontal ground motion only. Shear‐displacement capacity curves of the 18 subway station structures were obtained, and IDR limits were defined for each structure based on the relationship between the capacity curves and performance objective. Statistical analysis of the results demonstrated that the IDR limits considering the vertical ground motion (characterized by the same frequency with horizontal component) are smaller than that without consideration of the vertical ground motion. Based on these results, the IDR limit of 0.05%, 0.21%, 0.46%, and 0.72% is assigned for the four performance levels, respectively, for rectangular frame underground structures. The performance evaluation applied to Daikai station based on the proposed limits is found to be consistent with the actual postearthquake damage observations. The proposed limits of IDR could provide some guidance to the seismic design of underground structures, and could form the basis for developing appropriate performance limits for seismic provisions in design codes relevant to underground structures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".