Distinct element modeling of the dynamic response of a rocking podium tested on a shake table
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
Abstract A blind prediction contest was organized to evaluate the ability of different modeling approaches to simulate the seismic rocking response of a full‐scale four‐column podium structure. The structure was tested on a shake table, and was subjected to two bidirectional ground motion ensembles comprising 100 synthetic records each. This short communication presents the main assumptions and results from the model, developed using the distinct element method, which provided the second‐best prediction of the experimental results. A comparison of the model predictions and the experimental results demonstrates that the numerical model was generally able to reproduce the large displacements induced by the more intense ground motion ensemble, while tending to overestimate the displacements of the less intense earthquake ensemble. This overestimation of the response was reduced through the inclusion of damping in the system. However, the addition of damping greatly increased the solve time, which is problematic for a competition, and in the case of the more intense ground motion ensemble also resulted in an underprediction of the maximum response of the structure.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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