MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399406443 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-13207

Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Self-Centering Prestressed Concrete Frames with and without Masonry Infill Walls: Experimental and Numerical Models

2024· article· en· W4399406443 on OpenAlexaff
Ruizhao Zhu, Tong Guo, Lianglong Song, Kun Yang, Gang Xu, Solomon Tesfamariam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfillMasonryStructural engineeringVulnerability (computing)Vulnerability assessmentGeotechnical engineeringPrestressed concreteGeologyEngineeringComputer sciencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interaction between masonry infill walls (MIWs) and a main structural system can impact the overall structural performance. However, there is no test to investigate the impact of MIWs on self-centering prestressed concrete (SCPC) frames, nor has there been a probabilistic performance evaluation considering the coupling effects of peak interstory drift ratio (PIDR) and residual interstory drift ratio (RIDR). This study compares the seismic performance of SCPC frames with and without MIWs through quasi-static tests and seismic risk assessment under mainshock–aftershock (MSAS) sequences. To begin, quasi-static tests on one-story SCPC frames with and without MIWs are performed to assess their seismic performance. A numerical simulation method for the SCPC frame with MIWs is then proposed and validated. Following that, the seismic performance of four multistory SCPC frames with and without MIWs is investigated under MSAS sequences at the maximum considered earthquake level. Finally, the seismic vulnerability assessment, considering the coupling effect of PIDR and RIDR under MSAS sequences, is conducted. The results indicate that cracks on the MIW present diagonal stepped cracks, and the MIW does not cause damage to the SCPC frame. When the MIW is damaged, the RIDR of the SCPC-MIW frame increases significantly; when the crack development is stable, the RIDR increases slowly as the interstory drift increases but remains at a very low level. Besides, when the MIW is damaged, an obvious deformation concentration effect occurs on the SCPC-MIW frame. The SCPC-MIW frame has a lower probability of exceeding the immediate occupancy level P(IO) than the SCPC frame, but it has a higher probability of exceeding the repairable level P(RE) when the seismic intensity is relatively small. Overall, the P(IO) and P(RE) of the SCPC and SCPC-MIW frames are higher under MSAS sequences than under MS-only sequences, except for the SCPC25 frame.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207