MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163106139

Seismic considerations for telecommunication towers mounted on building rooftops

2004· article· en· W3163106139 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ghyslaine McClure, Laura Georgi, Rola Assi

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsStructural engineeringTowerEngineeringShear wallBase (topology)Moment (physics)TelecommunicationsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lattice towers are used as antenna-supporting structures in telecommunication network systems. Some of these telecommunication towers represent critical links in a network and may be required to be fully functional during or immediately after a strong earthquake. In a densely built environment, towers are mounted on building rooftops and their response is influenced by the dynamic characteristics of the building itself. \nIn this study, time history analyses are used to explore the correlation between the building accelerations and the maximum seismic base shear as well as the base overturning moment of towers mounted on building rooftops. The models include two medium-rise buildings combined with two self-supporting lattice steel towers subjected to 45 horizontal accelerograms with varied frequency content. The tower base shear results are compared with the predictions based on a simplified formula proposed in building codes for secondary structures. Although data for the isolated buildings and towers is realistic, the combined structures do not exist.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207