Data-Driven Machine-Learning-Based Seismic Response Prediction and Damage Classification for an Unreinforced Masonry Building
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unreinforced masonry buildings are highly vulnerable to earthquake damage due to their limited ability to withstand lateral loads, compared to other structures. Therefore, a detailed assessment of the seismic response and resultant damage associated with such buildings becomes necessary. The present study employs machine learning models to effectively predict the seismic response and classify the damage level for a benchmark unreinforced masonry building. In this regard, eight regression-based models, namely, Linear Regression (LR), Stepwise Linear Regression (SLR), Ridge Regression (RR), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), and Neural Networks (NN), were used to predict the building’s responses. Additionally, eight classification-based models, namely, Naïve Bayes (NB), Discriminant Analysis (DA), K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Adaptive Boosting (AB), DT, RF, SVM, and NN, were explored for the purpose of categorizing the damage states of the building. The material properties of the masonry and the earthquake intensity were considered as the input parameters. The results from the regression models indicate that the GPR model efficiently predicts the seismic response with larger coefficients of determination and smaller root mean square error values than other models. Among the classification-based models, the RF, AB, and NN models effectively classify the damage states with accuracy levels of 92.9%, 91.1%, and 92.6%, respectively. In conclusion, the overall performance of the non-parametric models, such as GPR, NN, and RF, was found to be better than that of the parametric models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".