MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125499280 · doi:10.1002/eqe.3418

Clustering‐based adaptive ground motion selection algorithm for efficient estimation of structural fragilities

2021· article· en· W3125499280 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 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragilityCluster analysisAlgorithmSeismic hazardSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceGround motionConsistency (knowledge bases)Incremental Dynamic AnalysisStructural engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To accurately predict the seismic demands of structural systems, a proper set of ground motions representing the seismic hazard of a given site is needed. In general, such a set includes a large number of ground motions, and thus may result in high computational cost. To address this computational challenge without compromising the accuracy of structural fragility, this paper proposes a clustering‐based algorithm that can select a representative subset of ground motions adaptively from a given set of ground motions. First, critical features of ground motions that significantly affect seismic demands of the structural system are identified by Lasso regression of seismic responses of various single degree of freedom systems on existing intensity measures of ground motions. Second, ground motions are selected adaptively based on the hierarchical clustering of the critical features until the fragility curve converges. Applications to a reinforced concrete building and steel moment‐resisting frames demonstrate the improved efficiency and wide applicability of the proposed method. The results of the numerical examples confirm the robust performance of the proposed algorithm against various ground motions, structural types, and definitions of the limit‐states. The proposed algorithm enables us to obtain structural fragilities using a significantly reduced number of ground motions while keeping consistency with the available ground motion set.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.441
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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