Conditional Spectrum-Based Ground Motion Selection. Part II: Intensity-Based Assessments and Evaluation of Alternative Target Spectra

In a companion paper, an overview and problem definition was presented for ground motion selection on the basis of the conditional spectrum (CS), to perform risk-based assessments (which estimate the annual rate of exceeding a specified structural response amplitude) for a 20-story reinforced concrete frame structure. Here, the methodology is repeated for intensity-based assessments (which estimate structural response for ground motions with a specified intensity level) to determine the effect of conditioning period. Additionally, intensity-based and risk-based assessments are evaluated for two other possible target spectra, specifically the uniform hazard spectrum (UHS) and the conditional mean spectrum (CMS, without variability).It is demonstrated for the structure considered that the choice of conditioning period in the CS can substantially impact structural response estimates in an intensity-based assessment. When used for intensity-based assessments, the UHS typically results in equal or higher median estimates of structural response than the CS; the CMS results in similar median estimates of structural response compared with the CS but exhibits lower dispersion because of the omission of variability. The choice of target spectrum is then evaluated for risk-based assessments, showing that the UHS results in overestimation of structural response hazard, whereas the CMS results in underestimation. Additional analyses are completed for other structures to confirm the generality of the conclusions here. These findings have potentially important implications both for the intensity-based seismic assessments using the CS in future building codes and the risk-based seismic assessments typically used in performance-based earthquake engineering applications

Conditional Spectrum-Based Ground Motion Selection. Part I: Hazard Consistency for Risk-Based Assessments

The conditional spectrum (CS, with mean and variability) is a target response spectrum that links nonlinear dynamic analysis back to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for ground motion selection. The CS is computed on the basis of a specified conditioning period, whereas structures under consideration may be sensitive to response spectral amplitudes at multiple periods of excitation. Questions remain regarding the appropriate choice of conditioning period when utilizing the CS as the target spectrum. This paper focuses on risk-based assessments, which estimate the annual rate of exceeding a specified structural response amplitude. Seismic hazard analysis, ground motion selection, and nonlinear dynamic analysis are performed, using the conditional spectra with varying conditioning periods, to assess the performance of a 20-story reinforced concrete frame structure. It is shown here that risk-based assessments are relatively insensitive to the choice of conditioning period when the ground motions are carefully selected to ensure hazard consistency. This observed insensitivity to the conditioning period comes from the fact that, when CS-based ground motion selection is used, the distributions of response spectra of the selected ground motions are consistent with the site ground motion hazard curves at all relevant periods; this consistency with the site hazard curves is independent of the conditioning period. The importance of an exact CS (which incorporates multiple causal earthquakes and ground motion prediction models) to achieve the appropriate spectral variability at periods away from the conditioning period is also highlighted. The findings of this paper are expected theoretically but have not been empirically demonstrated previously

Conditional Spectrum Computation Incorporating Multiple Causal Earthquakes and Ground‐Motion Prediction Models

The Conditional Spectrum (CS) is a target spectrum (with conditional mean and conditional standard deviation) that links seismic hazard information with ground motion selection for nonlinear dynamic analysis. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) estimates the ground motion hazard by incorporating the aleatory uncertainties in all earthquake scenarios and resulting ground motions as well as the epistemic uncertainties in ground motion prediction models (GMPMs) and seismic source models. Typical CS calculations to date are produced for a single earthquake scenario using a single GMPM, but more precise use requires consideration of at least multiple causal earthquakes and multiple GMPMs that are often considered in a PSHA computation. This paper presents the mathematics underlying these more precise CS calculations. Despite requiring more effort to compute than approximate calculations using a single causal earthquake and GMPM, the proposed approach produces an exact output that has a theoretical basis. To demonstrate the results of this approach and compare the exact and approximate calculations, several example calculations are performed for real sites in the western U.S. (WUS). The results also provide some insights regarding the circumstances under which approximate results are likely to closely match more exact results. To facilitate these more precise calculations for real applications, the exact CS calculations can now be performed for real sites in the U.S. using new deaggregation features in the U.S. Geological Survey hazard mapping tools. Details regarding this implementation are discussed in this paper

Doped Mott insulators are insulators: hole localization in the cuprates

We demonstrate that a Mott insulator lightly doped with holes is still an insulator at low temperature even without disorder. Hole localization obtains because the chemical potential lies in a pseudogap which has a vanishing density of states at zero temperature. The energy scale for the pseudogap is set by the nearest-neighbour singlet-triplet splitting. As this energy scale vanishes if transitions, virtual or otherwise, to the upper Hubbard band are not permitted, the fundamental length scale in the pseudogap regime is the average distance between doubly occupied sites. Consequently, the pseudogap is tied to the non-commutativity of the two limits $U\to\infty$ ($U$ the on-site Coulomb repulsion) and $L\to\infty$ (the system size).Comment: 4 pages, 3 .eps file

Enhancement of Recombinant Protein Production in Transgenic Nicotiana benthamiana Plant Cell Suspension Cultures with Co-Cultivation of Agrobacterium Containing Silencing Suppressors.

We have previously demonstrated that the inducible plant viral vector (CMViva) in transgenic plant cell cultures can significantly improve the productivity of extracellular functional recombinant human alpha-1-antiryspin (rAAT) compared with either a common plant constitutive promoter (Cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S) or a chemically inducible promoter (estrogen receptor-based XVE) system. For a transgenic plant host system, however, viral or transgene-induced post-transcriptional gene silencing (PTGS) has been identified as a host response mechanism that may dramatically reduce the expression of a foreign gene. Previous studies have suggested that viral gene silencing suppressors encoded by a virus can block or interfere with the pathways of transgene-induced PTGS in plant cells. In this study, the capability of nine different viral gene silencing suppressors were evaluated for improving the production of rAAT protein in transgenic plant cell cultures (CMViva, XVE or 35S system) using an Agrobacterium-mediated transient expression co-cultivation process in which transgenic plant cells and recombinant Agrobacterium carrying the viral gene silencing suppressor were grown together in suspension cultures. Through the co-cultivation process, the impacts of gene silencing suppressors on the rAAT production were elucidated, and promising gene silencing suppressors were identified. Furthermore, the combinations of gene silencing suppressors were optimized using design of experiments methodology. The results have shown that in transgenic CMViva cell cultures, the functional rAAT as a percentage of total soluble protein is increased 5.7 fold with the expression of P19, and 17.2 fold with the co-expression of CP, P19 and P24