MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115697408 · doi:10.71846/18-wcee-1895

ON THE ASSESSMENT OF RELIABILITY-CONSISTENT SEISMIC DESIGN LOAD CONTOUR MAPS FOR CANADIAN SITES

2025· article· en· W7115697408 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Conference of Earthquake Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeismic hazardPeak ground accelerationIncremental Dynamic AnalysisReturn periodEarthquake scenarioSeismic analysisSeismic riskEarthquake simulationReliability (semiconductor)Spectral acceleration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The geographically varying characteristics of the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral acceleration (SA) can be appreciated from the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis results and seismic hazard maps, which formed the basis for the seismic design provisions recommended in the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC). The results of the seismic hazard also indicated that the coefficient of variation of the annual maximum PGA or SA for different regions in Canada can be very different. This implies that the use of a single return period in assigning the seismic design value may not ensure the reliability-consistent seismic design, where the reliability-consistent design is also known as risk-targeted design. Also, the results of reliability analysis suggest that the probability of incipient damage and the probability of incipient collapse vary very slowly with the return period employed to specify the seismic design load, and the required return period to achieve consistent reliability indices differs significantly for different values of the coefficient of variation of the seismic ground motion parameter. In the present study, we provide some preliminary results in comparing the 6th generation Canadian seismic hazard map (CanSHM6) to that obtained based on the spatially smoothed seismicity, and the develop reliability-consistent seismic design maps. For the evaluation of seismic hazard maps based on the smoothed seismicity, for consistency, the ground motion models used to develop CanSHM6 are adopted, where the smoothing is carried out by considering the earthquake magnitude dependency. The evaluation of the reliability-consistent seismic design maps based on an equivalent single-degree-of-freedom system is also carried out by considering incipient collapse and incipient yield.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.201 · 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