MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413372448 · doi:10.18280/mmep.120719

Assessment of Earthquake Action Resistance of Precast I-Girder Prestressed Concrete Intersection Bridge Based on Modal Seismic and Demand to Capacity Ratio Methods

2025· article· en· W4413372448 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Afyaa Saad Neamaha, Ali Fadhil Naser

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecast concreteStructural engineeringEarthquake resistanceBridge (graph theory)GirderModalEngineeringIntersection (aeronautics)Prestressed concreteGeotechnical engineeringTransport engineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The methodology of this study consisted of selecting the bridge structure, creating a bridge model by using CSI-Bridge Ver. 25, applying ground movement within bridge location as earthquake load, using modal analysis method and demand/capacity ratio method to evaluate the seismic resistance of bridge structure.The results showed that the average value of seismic natural frequency is small and equal to 1.566 Hz which is small value, indicating insufficient stiffness and elasticity.For the transverse direction (Y) representing the cross-section of the bridge, the magnitudes of D/C ratio are similar for each bent with the maximum value equal to 0.4484 at bent No. 5, which is lower than 1.But in longitudinal direction of bridge line (X), the D/C ratio for all bents is near and equal to 2.396 as maximum value within bent No. 5 which much greater than 1, indicating that the demand is more than capacity of bridge bents and they can't resist the earthquake lateral load.This study suggested to increase the piers diameter to increase the size of bridge piers, leading to improve the structural performance, stiffness, elasticity, bearing capacity of bridge piers to resists the earthquake action and the increasing of piers diameter is 1.6 m, 1.8 m, and 2 m.The analysis showed than the increasing of piers diameter leads to an increase the seismic natural frequency and decreasing of D/C ratio for all bents with diameters 1.8 m and 2 m.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207