MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220886605 · doi:10.1061/9780784484043.064

Simplified Bayesian Ground Motion Models for Cumulative Absolute Velocity in Central and Eastern North America

2022· article· en· W4220886605 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

VenueGeo-Congress 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingBayesian probabilityStrong ground motionGround motionGeographyGeologyGeodesyComputer scienceSeismologyData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) has recently emerged as a useful intensity measure (IM) for predicting the occurrence of liquefaction and its consequences, including foundation settlement. However, few ground motion models for CAV exist that are applicable in Central and Eastern North America (CENA). The relative paucity of strong motion data for this region and tectonic setting, particularly for large earthquakes and short distances to rupture, is the primary challenge hindering the development of such models. This study applies a Bayesian approach to develop a ground motion model for CAV in CENA. This approach consists of first developing a model using a large database (drawn from the NGA-West2 database), then updating the coefficients in light of observations from a smaller database which is specific to the region of interest (drawn from the NGA-East database). The models developed using the Bayesian approach are compared with using the same functional form in a traditional regression strategy with the NGA-East data, as well as with the model regressed with the NGA-West2 data and with other models in the literature. The Bayesian approach prevents overfitting in the NGA-East data, where few records are available for large magnitude earthquakes at short distances. The use of NGA-West2 data to constrain development of models for CENA follows existing studies that use NGA-West2 models as a baseline and develop adjustments to make the models applicable in a different region and tectonic setting. The Bayesian approach proposed in this study is also applicable for developing other region-specific ground motion models for regions that lack data compared to regions such as California, New Zealand, and Japan that have relatively rich data available.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · 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