Performance of RC Cast-in-Place Buildings During The November 26, 2019 Albania Earthquake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper documents performance of cast-in-place reinforced concrete (RC) buildings in the Durrës during Albania earthquake of 26th of November 2019 (MW 6.4). Both mid- and high-rise RC buildings were affected by the earthquake, experiencing structural and/or non-structural damage and even collapse in some cases. The authors performed a reconnaissance study after the earthquake and were involved in seismic assessment of buildings in the affected area. Besides the observations related to physical damage related to RC buildings, the paper also presents results of a statistical analysis of damaged RC buildings in the Durrës city. The discussion in the paper is focused on damage patterns and failure mechanisms that are relevant for the seismic response of RC structures. Most common damage pattern is related to masonry infill walls, which experienced damage and failure in some cases, and affected the performance of adjacent RC columns due to the infill/frame interaction. Taller RC framed buildings (10 storeys and higher) were expected to have RC shear walls; however, these walls were reportedly absent in the damaged buildings of this type. In some cases, masonry infill walls (instead of RC shear walls) were used in the elevator shaft areas, which resulted in inadequate seismic performance. Two case study buildings were presented in detail to illustrate seismic behaviour of cast-in-place RC buildings. The case study is based on field observations after the earthquake and a detailed seismic assessment study. Finally, relevant lessons and recommendations are presented in light of the observed performance of RC buildings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".