Ground‐motion models for inelastic response spectra using NGA‐West2 database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents ground‐motion models (GMMs) for inelastic response spectra using the NGA‐West2 database. The inelastic response spectra are defined in terms of constant ductility. The GMMs are used to observe the effect of event scenarios, site conditions, and oscillator properties on maximum displacement. Using a large database enabled us to quantify the magnitude scaling of inelastic response as compared to that for the traditional elastic GMMs. We observe that using the magnitude scaling of elastic GMM for hazard analysis of inelastic structural response can be unconservative for large magnitudes and large ductility ratios. To compare our models with models in the literature, we use the developed GMMs to compute the Reduction Factor due to inelasticity. Comparison of this model with models in the literature shows the importance of considering the effect of magnitude on the Reduction Factor. We also observe that the ratio of RotD100/RotD50 is larger for inelastic single‐degree‐of‐freedom system than that for elastic system, and the ratio increases with increasing ductility.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".