MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402501837 · doi:10.11159/icceia24.136

Quantifying Seismic Resilience of Highway Bridges: A Case Study using Bayesian Neural Network

2024· article· en· W4402501837 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jacob Atkins, Farahnaz Soleimani, Donya Hajializadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on New Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOregon State University
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Artificial neural networkBayesian probabilityComputer scienceBayesian networkEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic resilience assessment of critical infrastructures is paramount for enhancing emergency mitigation planning and ensuring robust system performance in seismic hazard scenarios.This study focuses on evaluating the seismic resilience of highway bridges, crucial components of transportation networks whose proper functioning post-hazard events is essential for overall network integrity.While machine learning (ML) approaches have gained traction in earthquake engineering, their application to bridge resilience quantification remains underexplored.Improved ML algorithms, such as artificial neural networks (ANN), offer an alternative to laborintensive computational analyses while enhancing model accuracy.This study introduces a novel Bayesian approach to quantify ANNbased bridge resilience.Applied to a typical class of highway bridges in California, the proposed methodology demonstrates its efficacy in estimating seismic resilience metrics.The findings indicate that the Bayesian network performs comparably to conventional neural network approaches, underscoring its potential significance in efficiently estimating network resilience and informing infrastructure resilience-based assessments and rapid decision-making processes.This research contributes to advancing computational frameworks for resilience estimation and offers valuable insights for enhancing infrastructure resilience and emergency preparedness efforts.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on New TechnologiesSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207