COMPARISON OF METHODOLOGIES FOR QUANTIFICATION OF SEISMIC PERFORMANCE FACTORS IN US AND CANADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The FEMA P695 was developed in U.S. to address the need for consistent and rational quantification of the required parameters defining building system performance (R, Cd, Omega) and response in the Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7). The FEMA P-695 document focuses on evaluating structural systems for new construction, with the objective of minimizing the risk of structural collapse under maximum considered earthquake. The procedure considers factors like the R factor, displacements, and material detailing to achieve a target design ductility. The intention was for this methodology to be adopted by ASCE/SEI 7, setting minimum design criteria for code-approved systems, and guiding the selection of criteria for other systems. The document also serves as a basis for evaluating code-approved systems and potentially modifying or eliminating those that cannot meet seismic performance objectives reliably. Similarly, National Research Council Canada (NRC) recently developed and published a performance-based unified (PBU) procedure for the determination of seismic force modification factors (ductility-related, Rd, and over-strength related, Ro) of different seismic force-resisting systems (SFRS) in the National Building Code of Canada (NBC). While this recently developed procedure is primarily inspired by the FEMA P-695 methodology, it is yet devised with a few additional features to: 1) benefit from the concepts of performance-based design by assessing the seismic performance of buildings, not only for collapse prevention, but also for other performance levels (i.e., life safety and immediate occupancy); and 2) reduce the number of laborious Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) runs via a two-tiered screening procedure. The PBU procedure intends to provide a more balanced approach to evaluate different SFRSs and quantify the seismic force modification factors in the NBC by using nonlinear static and time history analyses, as well as IDA as needed. The PBU procedure also considers the different sources of uncertainties in performance assessments using both screening and IDA. In this paper, the PBU procedure is compared with the FEMA P695 procedure, via a seismic performance assessment of a few SFRSs in the NBC.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".