MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154400964 · doi:10.1002/eqe.3464

An integrated simulation method for soil‐structure interaction analysis of nuclear structures

2021· article· en· W3154400964 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Huang, Oh‐Sung Kwon, Tae‐Hyun Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperstructureSoil structure interactionFinite element methodSeismic analysisFoundation (evidence)Computer scienceInterface (matter)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the development, implementation and application of an integrated simulation method for non‐linear soil‐structure interaction (SSI) analysis of nuclear structures. The integrated simulation method allows decomposition of the soil‐structure system into three subsystems: the superstructure, the soil‐foundation interface, and the soil domain. Each decomposed subsystem can be modelled independently using a proper finite element analysis program to accurately represent its non‐linear behaviour as per the current guideline for non‐linear SSI analysis of nuclear structures. The integrated simulation method is applicable to both static and dynamic analysis cases. The method was applied to the detailed SSI analysis of a realistic nuclear containment structure. The analysis was benefited by using different analysis tools for the three subsystems to capture both material and geometrical nonlinearities such as sliding and gapping at the soil‐foundation interface. The integrated model was compared with the model based on the fixed‐base assumption. Different results address the importance of non‐linear SSI analysis for seismic performance assessment of nuclear 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthquake Engineering & Structural DynamicsSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207