MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115713776 · doi:10.71846/18-wcee-2630

SEISMIC UPGRADE OF THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT BUILDING

2025· article· en· W7115713776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Conference of Earthquake Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpgradeParliamentModernization theorySeismic zoneSeismic analysisKey (lock)Commission

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Centre Block, Canada's heritage designated federal Parliament building located on Parliament Hill, Ottawa, was constructed in 1916 after fire destroyed an earlier building of the same name that occupied the site. The building, and its iconic 92 m tall Peace Tower, is currently undergoing a major rehabilitation that includes conservation of its heritage fabric, modernization of its mechanical and electrical systems, enclosure of its interior light courts with glass roofs, the addition of a large multi-level below grade Parliament Welcome Centre, and a comprehensive seismic upgrade. The seismic upgrade is particularly complex due to the historic materials used in Centre Block's construction and the heritage finishes that adorn its walls, floors, and ceilings. At the schematic design level, two general upgrade approaches were explored: a conventional seismic upgrade and an upgrade incorporating seismic isolation. Although not commonly used in moderate seismic zones, the upgrade incorporating seismic isolation was found to be highly effective, less intrusive and to provide a greater level of protection to the building and its finishes. This paper provides an overview of the existing building and its historic construction materials. A summary of its current seismic performance level, key vulnerabilities, and goals of its seismic upgrade are discussed. Key decisions relating to the seismic isolation system design and superstructure strengthening are explained.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 venueWorld Conference of Earthquake EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207