MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197755339 · doi:10.3390/buildings11090392

Simplified Seismic Assessment of Unreinforced Masonry Residential Buildings in the Balkans: The Case of Serbia

2021· article· en· W3197755339 on OpenAlexaff
Predrag Blagojević, Svetlana Brzev, Radovan Cvetković

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnreinforced masonry buildingMasonryEurocodeSeismic analysisCivil engineeringForensic engineeringGeologyEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents a study on the existing low-rise unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings constructed in the period from 1945 to 1980 in Serbia and neighbouring countries in the Balkans. Buildings of this typology experienced damage in a few earthquakes in the region, including the 2010 Kraljevo, Serbia earthquake and the 2020 Petrinja, Croatia earthquake. The focus of the study is a seismic design approach for Simple masonry buildings according to Eurocode 8, Part 1, which is based on the minimum requirements for the total wall area relative to the floor plan area, which is referred to as Wall Index (WI) in this paper. Although the intention of Eurocode 8 is to use WI for design of new buildings, the authors believe that it could be also used for seismic assessment of existing masonry buildings in pre- and post-earthquake situations. A study on 23 URM buildings damaged in the 2010 Kraljevo, Serbia earthquake has been presented to examine a relationship between the WI and the extent of earthquake damage. Seismic evaluation of a typical 3-storey URM building damaged in the 2010 earthquake was performed according to the requirements of seismic design codes from the former Yugoslavia and Eurocode 8.

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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207