Seismic Resilience Assessment of a Regional Bridge Network
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study evaluates the seismic resilience of a regional bridge network, focusing on the interconnectedness and interdependence among individual bridges and emergency facilities. A framework for resilience assessment is developed and applied to a bridge network in Vancouver, British Columbia, consisting of 11 bridges across seven main routes. The methodology integrates fragility‐based models to calculate network resilience, considering various bridge configurations, including monolithic and seismically isolated bridges. The analysis highlights that bridges with seismic isolation exhibit superior resilience and functionality compared to monolithic bridges, especially under higher seismic intensities. Network damage, reliability, and resilience indices are used to quantify the impact of individual bridge failures on overall network performance. The results demonstrate the importance of bridge type and network topology on resilience, emphasizing that increasing alternative paths between critical nodes enhances network reliability and reduces vulnerability. These findings offer valuable insights for disaster mitigation strategies and infrastructure resilience planning in seismic‐prone regions.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it