MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115726552 · doi:10.71846/18-wcee-0301

ASSESSMENT OF PLAN IRREGULARITY LIMITS IN THE NEW ZEALAND STANDARD - NZS 1170.5

2025· article· en· W7115726552 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
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Work (physics)Shear wallMoment (physics)Seismic analysisLimit (mathematics)Structural system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Buildings with plan irregularities are susceptible to increased damage levels under seismic excitation. This is due to the amplification and concentration of demands on certain structural members stemming from torsional modes of response. NZS 1170.5 specifies a limit on the torsional irregularity allowed in buildings to mitigate these effects. However, there are no additional restrictions or guidelines on acceptable global response of the structure. This is in contrast with other specifications, such as the American and Canadian building codes, which provide system restrictions and acceptable global structural response based on the magnitude of seismic hazard. Considering these differences, this research is focused on quantifying the effectiveness of NZS 1170.5 in dealing with plan-irregular buildings relative to other international standards. The first phase of this work consisted of a comprehensive literature review that summarized the irregularity requirements from a significant number of international guidelines. The current phase of the work consists of a comparative study that will assess the seismic performance of two selected case study buildings - one with a reinforced concrete shear wall lateral force resisting system and the other with special steel moment frames - modelled to capture various levels of plan irregularities while accounting for the response thresholds and system restrictions in several international building codes. These case study buildings are representative of current design practices in New Zealand and will be modelled using nonlinear numerical techniques. The case study buildings will be subjected to spectrally matched, hazard-consistent ground motions scaled to varying site-specific intensities. The results from this study will provide quantitative data that will be used to update the plan irregularity specifications in New Zealand.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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