Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seismic vulnerability assessments of many existing deck-truss bridges often reveals the vulnerability of their substructure and many superstructure members. As an alternative to costly strengthening of many components or seismic isolation, an innovative retrofit strategy developed which requires only replacement of the existing non-ductile end and lower-end bracing with ductile panels. By incorporating these energy dissipating devices acting as fuses, these devices can yield and dissipate energy while protecting both superstructure and substructure. A 27-ft long deck-truss bridge model was designed and constructed at the University of Ottawa and was pseudo-dynamically tested in its as-built as well as retrofitted conditions. Two configurations of Eccentrically Braced Frames, EBF, and Vertical Shear Links, VSL, were used as ductile retrofits, and both performed well. The ductile retrofit devices exhibited a robust hysteretic behavior, dissipated the seismic induced energy and prevented damage in other structural members of the model bridge when it was subjected to scaled El Centro earthquake. This paper describes the retrofit concept, the innovative seismic testing procedure, and the performance of the steel ductile retrofits.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.501 | 0.333 |
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".