MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417252690 · doi:10.1177/13694332251405900

Towards a low-damage seismic design: Developing and validating a performance-based design framework for segmental post-tensioned precast concrete piers

2025· article· en· W4417252690 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Structural Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrecast concreteFragilityPierSeismic analysisDisplacement (psychology)Incremental Dynamic AnalysisBridge (graph theory)Design methods

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Segmental post-tensioned precast concrete (SPPC) piers show significant potential for enhancing post-earthquake rehabilitation, yet a practical performance-based seismic design framework remains undeveloped. In this respect, the current study develops and validates a comprehensive framework, demonstrating SPPC piers’ ability to minimize damage to individual pier components while maintaining the integrity of the overall bridge system. The framework employs a two-tier design methodology that integrates a capacity-demand-diagram approach with fragility analysis. The capacity-demand-diagram method is used to ensure that the displacement demands of the SPPC piers are consistent with predefined seismic displacement targets at the design earthquake level, thus facilitating the efficient determination of preliminary design parameters. Subsequently, fragility analysis is employed to assess the probability of failure, allowing iterative refinement of the design parameters to meet damage tolerance requirements. The developed framework is validated through a case study that compares SPPC piers with conventional piers in high-seismic regions. This step-by-step analysis confirms the applicability of the framework and shows that SPPC piers can be effectively integrated into current seismic design practices, supporting a performance-based framework with ease and reliability.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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