MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400901888 · doi:10.1016/j.rcns.2024.07.002

Resilience of coastal bridges under extreme wave-induced loads

2024· article· en· W4400901888 on OpenAlexafffund
Jesika Rahman, Vahid Aghaeidoost, A. H. M. Muntasir Billah

Bibliographic record

VenueResilient Cities and Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Resilience (materials science)FragilityVulnerability (computing)Environmental scienceRogue wavePsychological resilienceRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceEnvironmental resource managementNonlinear systemBusinessMaterials sciencePhysicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Records of wave-induced damage on coastal bridges during natural hazards have been well documented over the past two decades. It is of utmost importance to decipher the loading mechanism and enhance the resilience of coastal bridges during extreme wave-inducing events. Quantification of vulnerability of these structures is an essential step in designing a resilient bridge system. Recently, considerable efforts have been made to study the force applied and the response of coastal bridge systems during extreme wave loading conditions. Although remarkable progress can be found in the quantification of load and response of coastal superstructures, very few studies assessed coastal bridge resiliency against extreme wave-induced loads. This paper adopts a simplified and practical technique to analyze and assess the resilience of coastal bridges exposed to extreme waves. Component-level and system-level fragility analyses form the basis of the resiliency analysis where the recovery functions are adopted based on the damage levels. It is shown that wave period has the highest contribution to the variation of bridge resiliency. Moreover, this study presents the uncertainty quantification in resiliency variation due to changes in wave load intensity. Results show that the bridge resiliency becomes more uncertain as the intensity of wave parameters increases. Finally, possible restoration strategies based on the desired resilience level and the attitude of decision-makers are also discussed.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResilient Cities and StructuresSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207