Incorporation of machine learning into multiple stripe seismic fragility analysis of reinforced concrete wall structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study proposes a novel procedure that incorporates machine learning (ML) into the multiple stripe analysis (MSA) approach to efficiently produce seismic fragility curves for reinforced concrete (R/C) shear walls in building frame systems. The proposed procedure aims to mitigate computational challenges associated with the original MSA approach. In this context, ML models were developed for predicting the failure probability of R/C walls subjected to ground motions based on a specified threshold of maximum interstory drift ratio (MIDR). Specifically, the result of each numerical analysis, taken as the output variable of the ML models, was classified as either “B” (Below) or “E” (Exceeding) to indicate whether the MIDR of R/C walls was below or exceeding the specified threshold. This binary categorization was then used to calculate the failure probability points, which are necessary to derive fragility curves per the MSA approach. Data for training and testing the ML models were generated from nonlinear time history analyses of 46 distinct R/C walls subjected to 1000 ground motions. The R/C walls varied in height from four to 40 stories, and the ground motions included far-field, near-field pulse, and near-field no-pulse types. Four well-established ML methods , including random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting, light gradient boosting machine , and categorical boosting, were considered. The performances of the ML models were compared using a confusion matrix . Based on this comparison, the RF model was selected and incorporated into the proposed procedure. Subsequently, the proposed approach was demonstrated to create the seismic fragility function of a new R/C wall structure. This study highlights the potential of ML applications in optimization problems within the earthquake engineering domain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".