Comparison of the FEMA P-154 Methodology with Seismic Analysis in the “Galería Tradición” of Cercado de Lima
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seismic vulnerability of buildings with considerable age represents a crucial challenge for urban resilience in a historic city like Lima.In this research, a sample of 30 publicly accessible galleries within the Cercado de Lima was evaluated.These structures were built with now-obsolete structural systems and are subject to deteriorated conditions.The FEMA P-154 methodology was applied to conduct rapid visual inspections and to classify the structures according to their level of seismic vulnerability based on the score established by the format.Additionally, a gallery with a critical FEMA score was selected for structural modeling in ETABS using previously scaled historical seismic records, following the guidelines of the E.030 Seismic Design Code.A Schmidt hammer test was also conducted to estimate the concrete strength of the selected building.The results show that more than one-third of the buildings exhibit high vulnerability and that the drifts obtained in the dynamic analysis exceed the limits established by the E.030 code.The FEMA P-154 methodology proved to be an effective tool for prioritizing structural interventions in urban contexts with limited resources.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".