Redundancy in bridge substructures subjected to lateral loads and calibration of pier system factors
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
This paper summarizes the findings of the National Cooperative Research Program, NCHRP reports 458 and 776 that presented a procedure to calibrate system factors that account for the level of structural redundancy in typical highway bridge substructures under lateral loads. A proposed set of system factor equations are presented in a format suitable for inclusion in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Load and Resistance Factor Design Bridge Design Specifications and the Manual for Bridge Evaluation. In a first step, the study proposes a set of empirical equations to estimate the lateral load carrying capacity of substructure systems. A comparison between the results of a nonlinear pushover analysis and the empirical equation showed an error of about 8.7%. In a second step, a reliability-based approach is used to calibrate system factors that account for the redundancy and ductility in bridge substructures. The proposed approach replaces the subjectively assigned load modifiers in the current AASHTO design equations with properly calibrated equations. The results show that a system factor equal to 0.74 would ensure that the system reliability of a substructure under seismic loads will be 0.50 higher than the reliability level implied in current member-focused design specifications.
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 | 0.001 | 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