Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Review

A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research Trends in Performance-Based in Structural Design

Altmetrics

Downloads

53

Views

36

Comments

0

Submitted:

06 December 2024

Posted:

06 December 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
In the context of seismic hazard assessment and engineering design, a comprehensive understanding of local geological and geophysical factor is essential. However, previous studies have lacked crucial components such as local soil condition, ground response analysis, topographic influences, active fault characteristics,slip rates, groundwater behavior, and slope considerations. To ensure the accuracy of seismic hazard map of a country for the safe and cost-effective design of engineering structures in urban areas, a detailed analysis of these factors are imperative. Moreover, multidisciplinary investigations, such as logic tree considerations, are needed to enhance seismic hazard map. Consequently, the adoption of a performance based approach in structural design becomes an urgent necessity. Performance based approach allows engineers to design buildings to specified performance levels (IO, LS, CP) even without a reliable seismic hazard map. This approach is akin to a miracle for countries which doesn’t have reliable seismic hazard map. This study presents a systematic and comprehensive bibliometric analysis of academic literature pertaining to performance based design (PBD). By fostering collaborative efforts and expanding research networks, we aim to facilitate the development of coordinated initiatives within the field. Prefered Jouranals , Leading Countries, Leading Organizations and International institutions identified Utilizing the Scopus database. This study examined 3,469 PBD-related publications spanning from 1969 to 2023 using VOSviewer version 1.6.19, a bibliometric mapping and visualization software tool. The analysis of co-citations revealed that performance-based design serves as the primary theoretical foundation for structural design and analysis. Furthermore, through a co-word analysis, we tracked the evolution of research topics within the PBD domain over time. This investigation uncovered noteworthy trends, including the steady growth of research output, the increasing prominence of the term "PBD," and a focus on various types of performance based analyses.
Keywords: 
Subject: Engineering  -   Civil Engineering

1. Introduction

Witnessing the Japan earthquake magnitude 9, Morocco earthquake magnitude 6.8, and Syria and Turkey earthquake magnitude 7.8 left a profound impact [1,2,3,4]. The devastation caused by earthquakes, resulting in the loss of a million lives worldwide, every year and that makes it the deadest phenomenon in the planet, which drives our commitment to understanding and mitigating this threat [5].
The adoption of seismic design codes without necessary adjustments can lead to structural failure, especially in tall buildings [6,7,8]. In countries that do not have earthquake recording stations, where precise seismic hazard maps are unavailable or outdated, reliance on existing hazard maps is common [9,10,11]. However, these maps do not accurately represent the true seismic risks in those regions. Performance-based design (PBD), an advanced seismic approach, is crucial for designing and analysing existing and new tall structures [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. PBD allows engineers to design structures with specific performance goals, even in regions where precise seismic hazard maps are lacking. This adaptability, wherein design parameters can be adjusted based on expected seismic conditions, offers a viable solution for countries facing the challenge of creating reliable seismic hazard maps [20,21,22,23,24]. Implementing PBD alongside necessary design parameter adjustments can enhance building safety and mitigate earthquake risks in such regions [25,26,27,28,29].
As PBD becomes more important, there are several researches that delve into performance-based design in structural design of structures over the last fifty years [30,31,32,33]. Researching prior relevant research can also help academics gain an overview of the scholarly field to make predictions direction of research. However, due to the subjective character in past studies conducted in the field of PBD, it is necessary to conduct a quantitative literature review that would enable an insight into more areas and disclose the major areas where previous studies concentrated [34,35,36,37,38,39]. Bibliometrics, a qualitative analysis based on numbers in academic literary sources, provides measurable data [40,41,42,43]. The methodology is based on the analysis of data available in databases as bibliometrics. Such statistics provide an understanding of changes that have taken place in literature or scientific knowledge area during a certain period of time [44,45]. Bibliometrics comprises diverse methodologies including citation, co-citation, and bibliographic coupling, as well as a co-word analysis, that use different information for analysis [46,47,48]. This paper seeks to fill in that research gap through a systematic and quantitative analysis of PBD literature in leading structural journals and earth science and seismic journals with the support of bibliometrics. The study adopts a bibliometric method that incorporates co-citation and co-word analysis to explore and depict the underlying patterns of PBD research in general.
Objective:
This paper aims to analyse recent Performance Based Design (PBD) research trends by examining the dissemination patterns of journal articles. Specifically, our objectives are to:
1. Identify leading authors, countries, and academic institutions contributing to PBD literature.
2. Highlight prevalent terms and research topics within the field.
3. Determine dominant countries based on major PBD applications.
This analysis provides valuable insights for academics, policymakers, and researchers interested in understanding current research trends in PBD and exploring future research opportunities.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Performance Based Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures.

Due to the fact that they are adaptable, long-lasting and cheap, the construction industry has accepted perhaps some reinforced concrete structures [36,37,38]. They have high weight endurance, which enables security and comfortable living conditions. In this regard, traditional design approaches rely on the minimum code requirements, which may not necessarily be effective for better performance [39]. As a result of these that performance based design has come up, which seems to be more definite and useful in practice [49].
Performance based design considers the desired performance objectives for a structure and tests its behavior under various loading conditions [50,51,52]. It wants to upgrade the design considering safety, serviceability, sustainability and durability issues. Some of the benefits of this approach include better structural performance, reduced costs of construction, increased resistance to natural disasters and so forth [53,54,55,56,57,58,59].
One of the most important parts of performance-based design is performance. This is a description of the behaviour that the material is expected to portray in relation to each loading scenario [60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67]. For instance, acceptable performance can be established to mean that a dwelling remains operational if a moderate earthquake building fails during an intense earthquake. That enables designers to target performance levels that maximise materials utilization [68,69,70,71,72,73,74].
Another aspect of performance based design is the advanced analysis techniques [75,76]. However, unlike traditional design methods, simplifications and assumptions rarely accurately represent the structure behaviour. However, performance-based design utilizes high-tech computer software and numerological models that simulate the structure's performance in different dependencies [77,78,79,80,81,82,83]. This allows the designers to analyse and improve the structure performance by changing its design [84,85,86].
Secondly, the choice of materials and construction methods is vital for performance-driven design [87,88,89]. The use of high-performance materials such as high-strength concrete and steel reinforcement improves structural performance and reduces material requirements [90,91,92]. Furthermore, utilization of contemporary manner of fabrication, for instance, precast concrete systems and post-tensioning systems, can further reinstate the efficiency and lifespan of reinforced concrete infrastructure [93,94,95,96].
Sustainability principles are another factor by which performance-based design can be characterised. The whole purpose of looking at a structure’s environmental quality over its life cycle is to help the designers optimize resource use and minimize waste. For example, sustainable materials, low-energy design, and recycling and waste management [97].
That is why performance-based design of reinforced concrete structures is a widespread and dependable approach. Performance optimization, structure performance, durability, and resilience ensure the safety, security, and health of the occupants, enhance overall environmental sustainability, and efficiently use built space [98].

2.2. Bibliometric Analysis

2.2.1. Bibliometric Analysis: Unlocking Insights from Scientific Literature

With the information overflow, every day, myriad scientific articles are posted in various fields, making it very difficult to track down what is up-to-date and important [99]. It is here that bibliometric analysis comes in handy by offering a systematic and quantitative avenue for the evaluation and analysis of scientific literature [40].
Bibliometric analysis refers to a form of quantitative analysis conducted using statistical methods on individual or combined bibliographic databases to study impacts, patterns and trends in specific areas of research [47]. Only the bibliometric analysis of scholarly publications encompassed a variety of characteristics regarding citation patterns, authorship, and journal impact that reveal important features in this world [41].
Bibliographic analysis citation count may determine the role or significance of an article to the science community by researchers [100]. The development of citation analysis in locating landmark literature, key opinion leaders, and developing areas. The tool also assists researchers to compare their output and find possible partners and directions to be researched [42].
For instance, co-authorship analysis is very important in bibliometric analysis. Researchers could identify networks and communities of authors working in the same area in several ways [43]. This exposure may help identify potential research collaborations and partnerships. It also helps determine popular authors within their specific fields as co-authors for the materials [101].
One other useful application of bibliometric analysis is journal impact analysis. Researchers use the concept of the impact factor to measure a journal’s repute and influence in a particular field [44]. The analysis of journal impacts assists researchers in selecting high-ranking, influential publications for their research, thus ensuring wide publication and effective recognition [45].
Further, the analysis makes it possible to discover new research lines or ‘hot topics’ in a particular field [102]. By analyzing the frequency of keyword/concept use in scholarly publications, emerging interest and need for research can be identified [103]. Such information is helpful for researchers who wish to open new paths in future research or contribute to newly formed fields [104].
Bibliographic analysis, however, has wider applications, including measuring the performance of individuals or organizations or nations, even research groups [105]. Research productivity and impact of various entities can be assessed by evaluating the publication output, citation impact, and collaboration patterns. It provides grounds for comparing and evaluating the expenditure of funds and figuring out strategy [106].
However, these bibliometric limits need to be noted. It is often determined by what bibliographic data can be found and how dependable it is in different databases [107]. Additionally, it ignores the kind or worth of research apart from citations and may not include all interdisciplinary activities or non-traditional forms of publications [108].
Nevertheless, bibliometric analysis does have some flaws; yet it may be still used as a significant means for researchers, policy makers and funding agencies to study the scientific landscape [109]. It is a quantitative and evidence based approach to assess research impact, identify important works, and discover emerging trends [46]. Bibliometric analysis can enable researchers to be informed and take correct decisions, cooperate with each other and raise knowledge production in their own field [47].

3. Materials and Methods

Bibliometrics is a statistical analysis tool of publication that offers quantitative insight into academic literature. As mentioned by analysing data collected in the database, such as quotes, writers, keywords, or the number of articles read, the bibliometric analysis provides insight into the growth of literature and information transfer over a while within a given field. Bibliometrics includes various approaches such as citation analysis, co-citation analysis and bibliographic linking quotation, and co-word analysis for keywords, depending on which data it uses in research.
Data mining was carried out using the Scopus database from 1983 to 2023. The main theme of this thesis was a review article in the title and abstract that included " performance based design*."The oldest and most recent dates of publication return to 1983; the latest one is 2023. The search question string used was:
TITLE-ABS-KEY (“performance based design*.”) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, "English”)). This query string's output was 3456 documents.
The Single country publication (S.C.P) information was obtained by restricting the search results to a specific country using the field code AFFILCOUNTRY. Source, author, affiliation, country/territory, subject area and type of document are dependent on year, the central theme search results were analyzed. Bibliometric metrics have been used for ranking purposes, for instance, total articles, total citations, and h-index

3.1. The Bibliometric Maps

Citation, bibliography, and author keywords of 3456 publications have been exported to VOSviewer (version 1.6.19, Center for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands), a bibliometric mapping and visualization software tool. Maps contain items generated with VOSviewer. The items are the interest objects in this analysis and the keywords or countries of the author. There may be a link between any pair of items, connection or relationship between two items. Every relation has a strength which represents a positive value for numbers. The higher the value, the higher the relationship. The country-to-country link strength shows the number of publications co-authored for co-authorship study by two linked countries, whereas the cumulative strength of the connection indicates the total strength of a country's co-authorship connections with other countries. Likewise, the strength of the author's keyword association reflects the number of publications in which the co-occurrence study includes two keywords. In addition to that citation, bibliographic coupling and co-citation analysis types with full counting method were incorporated in this paper. we have ignored documents with a large number of authors, a maximum of 25.

4. Results

4.1. PART–1: Co-Authorship Analyzes:

Under this category we used the unit of analysis authors, organizations, and countries.

4.1.1. Category -I Co-Authorship -Author’s case -1

Our result showed that under this category, out of 3114 authors, only 7 meet the thresholds for each author. We calculated the total strength of the co-authorship links with other authors. The authors with the greatest total link strength were selected, as shown in Table 1.

4.1.2. Category -I Co-Authorship -Organization’s Case 2

Our result showed that under this category out of 5620 organizations 26 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 26 organizations the total strength of the co-authorship links with other organizations were calculated. The organizations with the greatest total link strength were selected as shown in Table 6. Urmia University Department of civil engineering in Iran is the leading university in this category.

4.1.3. Category -I Co-Authorship -Countries’ Case 3

Our result showed that under this category, out of 140 countries, 53 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 53 countries, the total strength of the co-authorship links with other countries was calculated. The countries with the greatest total link strength were selected as shown in Table 7. As per our analysis result, the United States is the leading country in this category, as shown in Figure 1.

4.2. PART – 2: Co-Occurrence Analysis

Under this category, we used the unit of analysis of all keywords, author keywords, and index keywords.

4.2.1. Category -II Co-Occurrence -All Keywords Case -1

Our result showed that under this category out of 17176 keywords, 1801 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 1801 keywords, the total strength of the co-occurrence links with other keywords was calculated. The keywords with the greatest total link strength were selected. Similarly, the keyword ‘performance-based design’ is the most frequently used keyword in most scholarly documents, as shown in Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4.

4.2.2. Category -II Co-Occurrence -Author Keywords Case -2

Our result showed that under this category out of 6956 keywords 381 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 381 keywords, the total strength of the co-occurrence links with other keywords was calculated. The keywords with the greatest total link strength were selected as shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6. As per the analysis result, the keyword ‘performance-based design’ is the most frequently co-occurrence word in most scholarly journals.

4.2.3. Category -II Co-Occurrence -Index Keywords Case -3

Our result showed that under this category out of 13502 keywords 1587 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 1587 keywords, the total strength of the co-occurrence links with other keywords was calculated. The keywords with the greatest total link strength were selected. As per the analysis results shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8, the word ‘performance-based design’ is the most used word in the scholarly community.
The 1000 most frequent keywords are displayed in the map. The text of the items is only shown for the keywords with 200 occurrences or more. The co-occurrence connectivity line is only rendered if the value is higher than 10.

4.3. PART – 3: Citation Analysis:

Under this category, we used the unit of analysis documents, sources, authors, organizations and countries.

4.3.1. Category -III Citation – Document’s Case -1

Our result showed that under this category out of 3469 documents, 3469 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 3469 documents, the number of citation links was calculated. The documents with the largest links were selected, as shown in Figure 9.

4.3.2. Category -III Citation – Source’s Case -2

Our result showed that under this category out of 972 sources 159 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 159 sources the total strength of the citation links with other sources were calculated. The sources with the greatest total link strength were selected. The result showed that most cited papers are from the engineering structures and earthquake engineering structures journal as shown in Figure 10.

4.3.3. Category -III Citation – Author’s Case -3

Our result showed that under this category, out of 3114 authors, 7 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 7 authors, the total strength of the citation links with other authors was calculated. The authors with the greatest total link strength were selected, as shown in Figure 11.

4.3.4. Category -III Citation – Countries Case -4

Our result showed that under this category, out of 140 countries, 53 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 53 countries the total strength of the citation links with other countries were calculated. The countries with the greatest total link strength were selected and US was the leading country in this category as shown in Figure 12.

4.4. PART – 4: Bibliographic Coupling Analysis:

Under this category we used the unit of analysis documents, sources, authors, organizations and countries.

4.4.1. Category -IV Bibliographic Coupling – Document’s Case -1

Our result showed that under this category out of 3469 documents 3469 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 3469 documents the total strength of the bibliographic coupling links with other documents were calculated. The documents with the greatest total link strength were selected as shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14.

4.4.2. Category -IV Bibliographic Coupling – Sources Case -2

Our result showed that under this category out of 972 sources 159 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 159 sources, the total strength of the bibliographic coupling links with other sources were calculated. The source with the greatest total link strength was engineering structures selected, as shown in Figure 15 and Figure 16.

4.4.3. Category -IV Bibliographic Coupling – Author’s Case -3

Our result showed that under this category out of 3114 authors 7 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 7 authors the total strength of the bibliographic coupling links with other authors were calculated. The authors with the greatest total link were selected. This result shows that in different analysis the result of the authors which meet the thresholds is only 7. In addition to that in the co-authorship analysis the result remains the same this analysis result reviles that in the field of performance based design there are no strong co-authorship link between scholars in different countries and universities this was one of the critical findings of his analysis.

4.4.4. Category -IV Bibliographic Coupling – Organization’s Case -4

Our result showed that under this category out of 5620 organizations 26 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 26 organizations the total strength of the bibliographic coupling links with other organizations were calculated. The organizations with the greatest total link strength were selected ; Department of civil engineering Urmia university form Iran takes a lead in this category with 17 documents and 400 citations as shown in Figure 17.

4.4.5. Category -IV Bibliographic Coupling – Countries Case -5

Our result showed that under this category out of 140 countries 53 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 53 countries the total strength of the bibliographic coupling links with other countries were calculated. The countries with the greatest total link strength were selected. United States takes a lead as shown in Figure 18 bibliographic coupling analysis result.

4.5. PART – 5: Co-Citation Analysis:

Under this category we used the unit of analysis cited references, cited sources, and cited authors.

4.5.1. Category -V Co-Citation –Cited References Case -1

Our result showed that under this category out of 84956 cited references 24 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 24 cited references the total strength of the co-citation links with other cited references were calculated. The cited references with the greatest total link strength were selected and prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of building 2000 paper leads this category by 135 citations and 150 total link strengths as shown in Figure 19.

4.5.2. Category -V Co-Citation –Cited Sources Case -2

Our result showed that under this category out of 80 sources all 80 meet the thresholds. For each of the 80 sources the total strength of the co-citation links with other sources were calculated. The sources with the greatest total link strength were calculated; International offshore and polar engineering conference took the lead in this category with only 4 citations as shown in Figure 20.

4.5.3. Category -V Co-Citation –Cited Author Case -3

Our result showed that under this category out of 61275 authors 1523 meet the thresholds.
For each of the 1523 authors the total strength of the co-citation links with other authors were calculated. The authors with the greatest total link strength were selected and priestley m.j.n. took the lead with 868 citations and 32230 total link strengths as shown in Figure 21 and Figure 22.

5. Discussion

5.1. Research Interest in Publication Output and Growth

As shown in Figure 23, 3456 research articles were published over a 42-year period. The oldest publication dates back to 1981, and until 1995, there was no record of publication. Beginning in 1999, a strong interest in PBD research is indicated. The annual rate of growth (ARG) increased dramatically in 2007 and also in 2020 and 2022, which is one indication of the critical need for PBD.
Annual publications have since increased steadily, leading to a substantial increase in the cumulative publications produced. Therefore, the annual publication is expected to continue increasing. However, most of these articles are not freely available, and the user must pay to access the information.
There are vast fields of PBD research, and many research groups worldwide are involved in different areas. The subject area study showed that PBD studies focused mainly on engineering, as Appendix A - Table 4 shows.
Even though PBD is a multidisciplinary area, one of which has been classified under the subject area of Engineering. Results have also shown that the publications used in this research have been articles and conference papers written in English only. The search question string used in the Scopus database comprises various sources. Most papers are 54.5 % articles and 37.7% conference papers, which comprise almost 92.2 % of the whole analysis documents, as shown in Table 2.

5.2. Prefered Jouranals ,Leading Countries, Leading Organizations and International Institutions

Table 3 lists the 30 most prominent authors in PBD for publication range of 1981 -2023, as follows: China 1 author, United States 11 authors, United Kingdom 2 authors, Greece 3 authors, Iran 3 authors, Canada 3 authors, Italy 3 authors, India 1 author, New Zealand 1 author, Australia 1 author, and Israel 1 author.
Chow, W. K. from China has a record number of 629 articles, 43 h-index and 8,503 citations since 1985 from The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Kareem Ahsan placed in second place with 454 articles, 66 h- index and 14268 citations since 1979 from the University of Notre Dame, United States. Next, van de Lindt & John W. are placed in third place with 366 articles, 44 h-index and 6310 citations since 1996 from Info Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States. Torero and José Luis are placed in the 4th place with 324 articles, 46 h- index and 7242 citations since 1993, associated with University College London, United Kingdom as shown in Table 3.
As per our analysis result, the 30 most productive countries/territories in PBD research and overall citation as of September 27th ,2023, in the Scopus database are presented in Table 9. The United States takes the lead with 1076 total cited documents and 18160 grand total citations. China comes to the 2nd place with 393 total cited documents and 3680 total citations. We found Canada in the 3rd place with 263 total cited documents and 4546 total citations. Lastly, we found Mexico in the 30th place with 20 cited documents and 266 total citations.

5.3. Author Keywords

Exploring the developments from 1981–2023 patterns in PBD research, the analysis used gathered all the keywords from the 3456 papers to study keywords and co-words. co-word networks were developed to demonstrate the relationships in visualised co-word networks in each field between the keywords and better understand changes to research interests over time. The study classified keywords that appeared in multiple times. According to the result in Table 8, the keyword ‘performance-based design’ occurred 2100 times with a total link strength of 6619. In the second place, the keyword ‘performance-based design’ occurred 1042 times with a total link strength of 3486, and it has been noted that the effect of keyword representation also affected the output result of our analysis. The keyword ‘seismic design’ occurred 970 times with a total kink strength of 4476. The keyword ‘performance-based seismic design’ occurred 137 times with a total link strength of 753.
Table 4. The top 30 most used keywords in the PBD research.
Table 4. The top 30 most used keywords in the PBD research.
No id keyword occurrences total link strength
1 10849 Performance based design 2100 6619
2 10974 Performance-based design 1042 3486
3 13194 Seismic design 970 4476
4 3513 Design 633 2400
5 14993 Structural design 615 2077
6 13415 Seismology 577 2673
7 4394 Earthquakes 503 2293
8 12321 Reinforced concrete 451 1945
9 584 Architectural design 335 1361
10 5814 Fires 317 835
11 14953 Structural analysis 292 1282
12 13341 Seismic response 255 1356
13 10842 Performance assessment 249 1265
14 15029 Structural frames 248 1109
15 4329 Earthquake engineering 233 1165
16 1422 Buildings 215 922
17 13301 Seismic performance 213 1155
18 15477 Tall buildings 196 818
19 12762 Risk assessment 195 711
20 2536 Concretes 185 799
21 10474 Optimization 183 705
22 5578 Finite element method 182 678
23 2446 Concrete construction 176 805
24 6775 Hazards 170 765
25 15102 Structural response 166 893
26 3415 Deformation 164 655
27 1798 Civil engineering 161 673
28 13394 Seismic waves 145 866
29 2436 Concrete buildings 144 778
30 10869 Performance based seismic design 137 753

5.4. Concept and Terminology

From the total 3456 documents our findings showed that PBD's most frequently identified keyword was ‘performance based design’ with occurrence of 2100 times and 6619 total links strengths to other keywords as shown in Table 4. Also, it has been noted that using general terms such as ' seismic design' 970 incidents, with 4476 links strengths, ‘design' 633 incidents with 240 total link strength and 'deformation' 164 incidents, with 655 total link strength and ‘structural design’ 615 incidents with 2077 total link strengths.
We also found some interesting keywords related to PBD publications. For example, ‘structural response’ 166 incidents, with 893 total link strengths. ‘Seismic waves’ 145 incidents with 866 total link strengths. Similarly, the word ‘hazards’ 170 incidences with 765 total link strength and other multiple words were found as shown in Table 4 and out of a total of 6956 author keywords, 381author keywords were used and meet the threshold, and used for the analysis for VOSviewer mapping by limiting a minimum requirement of 5 occurrences per analysis.

5.5. Topics of Interests

PBD methodology is analyzed and it is an evolving technology and the keyword ‘performance based design’ have occurred 2100 times with a link strength of 6619 as shown in Table 4.
The bubble width reflects the keyword frequency count, while the row thickness shows the keyword cooccurrence magnitude. Different research areas have been described and presented in the statistics. During the period 1981-2023, PBD work focused on these broad areas.
The top 22 most productive journals on PBD research with their most cited articles are presented in Table 5 and as per the analysis result the journal of Engineering structures found in the 1st place with the most cited article title ‘Novel visual crack width measurement based on backbone double-scale features for improved detection automation’ published by Elsevier Ltd. Which was cited 70 times as of October 2nd ,2023 as shown in Table 5.
As per our analysis result the 30 most productive research institutions in the PBD subject area versus documents whole institution and affiliation research work is presented in Appendix A-
Table 10. According to the analysis result, Tongji University from China has been found in the number one position with a total documents whole institution of 135,714 and affiliation only 124,656, and in the documents by subject area of engineering, a total document of 55,678.

6. Limitation of Study

The results of the search may not cover all studies related to PBD available on Scopus by restricting the search of TITLE-ABS-KEY (“performance based design*.”) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, "English”)). This query string's output was 3456 documents.in titles and abstracts. It is proposed to Compare future studies' performance of Several databases, such as the Web of Science. For example, the Web of Science search results automatically show the most popular articles in the field through a feature called ' hot paper, ' A feature Scopus lacks. The hot paper feature shows main papers Recognized as soon as published, Represented by a fast and large number of quotes. Bibliometric analysis using multiple data sources will be useful for a more comprehensive study.
In the PBD fields, the database was limited to just the above string query for all PBD studies; the patterns and trends produced in the study may not apply between 1981 and 2023. For better generalizability, more scientific publications should be included in future research over a longer study period. To identify new issues and trends related to this research topic, it is important to replicate or repeat existing quantitative study studies on PBD given an emerging area of research. However, the notion of clusters as the theoretical foundations of PBD work could be skewed because of the weaknesses of the bibliometric study. However, future research should develop an innovative classification tool to examine work trends and advances further. However, this research paper used only one VOSviewer program, so specific bibliometric analysis tools could be used for future studies.

7. Conclusions

This analysis presented an overview of developments in PBD research based on 3456 Scopus database publications since the last 42 years, publication growth has been strong, and it is expected to increase further.
We have discovered a huge number of publications and strong international collaborations in countries such as the United States and China. These institutions may offer incentives to researchers from other countries like Greece and Iran to expand their research collaborations. We also addressed many fields that are well explored at the moment, such as engineering and earth sciences. We also discussed several newly researched areas with PBD, such as seismic design and earthquake which could be potential hot topics for future studies.
In this paper, we provided a supplement evaluation on the global research trends in PBD studies, by summarizing the patterns of authorship, journal and subject categories, geographic and institutional distributions, and temporal evolutions of keyword frequencies. Our analysis suggested that there has been steady growth in the scientific outputs in PBD research and confirms the dynamic collaborations in this field. This paper could also be useful to inform decisions on curriculum development, library subscription, and research performance evaluation. Because bibliometric findings depended on selected bibliographic materials, our analysis and associated interpretations only aim at evaluating research progress based on the selected Scopus databases.
Here is a summary of major findings from our bibliometric analysis:
• Research output descriptors suggested a solid development in PBD research, in terms of increasing scientific production and research collaboration.
• The four most common categories were Performance based design, seismic design, seismology and earthquakes, civil engineering, and geological engineering, implying an applied tradition in PBD studies. Performance based design has the largest field showing its substantial influence in earthquake researches.
• The uneven geographic distribution of PBD publications is correlated with individual countries proneness to earthquakes.
• The US and China attained a leading position in PBD research by contributing the largest share of single-country and internationally collaborated articles.
• Similarly Table 9 shows that Tongji University and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University(China), National Technical University of Athens (Greece), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (US), Sapienza Università di Roma (Italy), University of Canterbury (New Zealand), University of California, Berkeley (US), The University of Edinburgh(Scotland) , Kyoto University (Japan), The University of British Columbia (Canada), Lehigh University (US), Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II (Italy), University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US), State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering (China) , Colorado State University (US), The University of Queensland (Australia) , The University of Sheffield (UK), Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (China), Georgia Institute of Technology (US), Texas A&M University (US), Sharif University of Technology (Iran), University of Washington (US), Oregon State University (US), Oregon State University (US), University of Toronto (Canada), The University of Tokyo (Japan), University at Buffalo, The State University of New York (US), Arup Group Limited (UK), Stanford University (UK), Stanford University (US), ETH Zürich (Switzerland),and Johns Hopkins University (US). It has to be noted that this result was found in the bases of the whole institutions and affiliation only documents and subject area publication document bases, hence these universities topped the list of productive institutions in PBD research.
• The most commonly used keywords appeared in the articles were performance based design, seismic design, structural design, seismology, earthquakes, reinforced concrete, architectural design, structural analysis, seismic response, performance assessment, structural frames, earthquake engineering, buildings, seismic performance, tall buildings, risk assessment, concretes,optimization,finite element method, concrete construction, hazards, structural response, deformation, civil engineering, seismic waves, concrete buildings, and performance based seismic design have received clearly increasing interests. The critical research ideas identified in this paper also includes; the effect of fiber reinforced polymer in performance based design of structures approach and the coupling of sequential analysis in PBD methodologies.
• In the category-I Co- Authorship – Countries case-3 collaboration network analysis, it is evident that United States holds an absolute core position in the field of performance based design research globally and has connections with other countries. The proportion of publications authored by US scholars is as high as 1076 documents with a total citation of as high as 18137. In addition to that in the category II; co-occurrence-All keywords case-1, co-occurrence-author keywords case-2, co-occurrence-index keywords case-3 analysis it was found out that the key word ‘performance based design’ is the most frequently used keyword in most scholarly articles in all the three analyses result. Similarly, the category III- citation – countries case 4 analysis result indicated that US has the greatest citation total link strength with other countries and UK found in the second position in this category.
• As per PART -5 Co-citation-cited references case-1 the total strength of the co-citation links with other cited references were calculated. The cited references with the greatest total link strength were selected and prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of building 2000 paper leads this category by 135 citations and 150 total link strengths. Similarly in the category V- Co-citation – cited sources case 2 analysis result the sources with the greatest total link strength were calculated and International offshore and polar engineering conference took the lead in this category. In the same way Co-citation-cited author case -3 analysis result the authors with the greatest total link strength were selected and priestley m.j.n. took the lead with 868 citations and 32230 total link strengths.
• In the citation analysis the top most productive journals on PBD research were identified and journal of Engineering Structures was found the most productive journal with a total publication of 1569 articles and a total citation of 52429. The most cited article was Novel visual crack width measurement based on backbone double-scale features for improved detection automation which was published by Elsevier Ltd. In the same way Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics was found in the 2nd place in this category and the most cited article was Reinforced moment-resisting glulam bolted connection with coupled long steel rod with screwheads for modern timber frame structures published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd. The journal of Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering was found in the 3rd place and the most cited article was Near-fault pulse seismic ductility spectra for bridge columns based on machine learning published by Elsevier Ltd. Journal of Geotechnical Geological and Earthquake Engineering was found in the 4th place and the most cited article was Seismic Response of Masonry Building Aggregates in Historic Centres: Observations, Analyses and Tests published by Springer Science and Business Media B.V. . The journal of Earthquake spectra was found at 22nd position and the most cited article was Monitoring Multi-criteria decision-making approach for optimal seismic/energy retrofitting of existing buildings published by SAGE Publications Inc. so as per the result the most active journals in the research of PBD was identified.
• A small group of prolific authors contributed to a significant share of publications in PBD research, and 30 authors made the top cited and most published lists simultaneously. Several collaborative clusters of authors were also visualized. As per the analysis result the 30 most prolific authors in the PBD research area was identified and Chow, W. K. from China current affiliation with The Hong Kong Polytechnic University took the lead with a total publication of 629 and the h-index of 43. Authors from the United States Spence and Seymour M.J. affiliation with University of Michigan Ann Arbor placed in the second place. In the same way Authors from Greece; Lagaros and Nikos D. current affiliation with National Technical University of Athens placed at 3rd position. Authors from Israil; Lavan and Oren currently affiliation with Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa was found in the 30th position. Hence the analysis result indicated the most 30 most active authors in the PBD research.
Overall, this study provides a comprehensive overview of the research on performance based design and identifies the key research topics and future directions for further exploration in PBD research area.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; methodology, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; software, M.A.; validation, formal analysis, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; investigation, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; resources, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; data curation, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A.; writing—review and editing, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; visualization, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; supervision, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A.; project administration, V.W.Y.T., A.C.J.E. and M.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to EIT privacy policy.

Acknowledgments

The authors extend their deepest gratitude to the Engineering Institute of Technology for their great support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table 6. Verified selected organisation.
Table 6. Verified selected organisation.
Id Organisation Documents Citations Total link strength
680 College of civil engineering, Tongji university, shanghai, 200092, china 7 34 0
1070 Department of civil and environmental engineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, 18015, pa, united states 6 81 0
1204 Department of civil and environmental engineering, university of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 48109, mi, united states 10 125 0
1229 Department of civil and environmental engineering, university of washington, seattle, wa, united states 5 97 0
1256 Department of civil and natural resources engineering, university of canterbury, christchurch, new zealand 12 238 0
1267 Department of civil and structural engineering, the university of sheffield, sheffield, united kingdom 8 180 1
1369 Department of civil engineering, colorado state university, fort collins, co, united states 6 23 0
1392 Department of civil engineering, faculty of engineering, university of qom, qom, iran 7 42 0
1562 Department of civil engineering, national taiwan university, taipei, taiwan 6 183 3
1621 Department of civil engineering, sharif university of technology, tehran, iran 13 210 3
1677 Department of civil engineering, university of british columbia, vancouver, bc, canada 7 126 0
1685 Department of civil engineering, university of canterbury, christchurch, new zealand 5 145 0
1722 Department of civil engineering, university of patras, patras, greece 6 2 2
1773 Department of civil engineering, urmia university, urmia, iran 17 400 0
2148 Department of structural engineering, tongji university, shanghai, 200092, china 6 139 2
2186 Department of structures for engineering and architecture, university of naples federico ii, via claudio 21, naples, 80125, italy 6 133 0
2339 Dept. of civil and environmental engineering, univ. of Michigan, ann arbor, 48109, mi, united states 9 225 5
2377 Dept. of civil Eng., univ. of southern California, los angels, 90089, ca, united states 5 60 0
2941 Federal highway administration, Baltimore, 21201, md, united states 5 96 5
3055 Georgia institute of technology, Atlanta, ga, united states 7 26 0
3057 Georgia institute of technology, united states 5 39 0
3899 National center for research on earthquake engineering, Taipei, Taiwan 5 91 3
4212 Research centre for fire engineering, department of building services engineering, Hong Kong polytechnic university, Hong Kong. 7 36 0
4594 School of engineering, the university of British Columbia, Kelowna, bc, Canada 5 98 1
4838 State key laboratory of disaster reduction in civil engineering, tongji university, shanghai, 200092, china 7 212 2
4839 State key laboratory of disaster reduction in civil engineering, tongji university, shanghai, china 6 33 3
Table 7. Verified selected countries.
Table 7. Verified selected countries.
id country documents citations total link strength
6 Algeria 6 29 3
9 Argentina 10 409 10
13 Australia 126 2313 91
14 Austria 19 192 13
17 Bangladesh 5 7 4
18 Belgium 35 366 28
21 Brazil 24 434 27
24 canada 263 4539 132
27 Chile 20 272 16
28 china 391 3610 172
31 Colombia 14 18 13
36 Croatia 13 127 15
37 Cyprus 12 237 10
38 Czech Republic 11 119 11
39 Denmark 21 144 17
43 Egypt 21 97 10
47 Finland 10 274 10
49 France 55 903 40
51 Germany 64 457 52
53 greece 96 2189 51
55 Hong Kong 88 1546 54
61 India 160 1332 30
62 Indonesia 23 37 8
64 iran 196 2582 56
65 Iraq 6 33 6
66 Ireland 9 66 3
67 Israel 23 358 9
68 italy 240 4662 121
69 Japan 238 2471 70
70 Jordan 5 4 3
73 Lebanon 5 8 2
77 Malaysia 19 112 9
79 Mexico 20 266 9
81 Netherlands 29 315 32
82 new zealand 67 1462 59
86 Norway 13 83 14
95 Poland 8 77 2
96 Portugal 45 791 32
101 Romania 9 83 3
106 Serbia 5 68 9
107 Singapore 31 884 20
109 Slovenia 9 88 7
111 south Africa 11 269 7
112 south Korea 79 733 38
113 Spain 36 497 22
121 Sweden 37 471 32
122 Switzerland 43 696 34
124 taiwan 63 669 20
126 Thailand 17 450 10
129 turkey 93 842 41
131 United Arab Emirates 11 36 6
132 United Kingdom 250 3936 168
133 united states 1076 18137 331
6 Algeria 6 29 3
9 Argentina 10 409 10
13 Australia 126 2313 91
14 Austria 19 192 13
17 Bangladesh 5 7 4
18 Belgium 35 366 28
21 Brazil 24 434 27
24 canada 263 4539 132
27 Chile 20 272 16
28 china 391 3610 172
31 Colombia 14 18 13
36 Croatia 13 127 15
37 Cyprus 12 237 10
38 Czech Republic 11 119 11
39 Denmark 21 144 17
43 Egypt 21 97 10
47 Finland 10 274 10
49 France 55 903 40
51 Germany 64 457 52
53 greece 96 2189 51
55 Hong Kong 88 1546 54
61 India 160 1332 30
62 Indonesia 23 37 8
64 iran 196 2582 56
65 Iraq 6 33 6
66 Ireland 9 66 3
67 Israel 23 358 9
68 italy 240 4662 121
69 Japan 238 2471 70
70 Jordan 5 4 3
73 Lebanon 5 8 2
77 Malaysia 19 112 9
79 Mexico 20 266 9
81 Netherlands 29 315 32
82 new zealand 67 1462 59
86 Norway 13 83 14
95 Poland 8 77 2
96 Portugal 45 791 32
101 Romania 9 83 3
106 Serbia 5 68 9
107 Singapore 31 884 20
109 Slovenia 9 88 7
111 south Africa 11 269 7
112 south Korea 79 733 38
113 Spain 36 497 22
121 Sweden 37 471 32
122 Switzerland 43 696 34
124 taiwan 63 669 20
126 Thailand 17 450 10
129 turkey 93 842 41
131 United Arab Emirates 11 36 6
132 United Kingdom 250 3936 168
133 united states 1076 18137 331
Table 8. Documents as per PBD subject Area.
Table 8. Documents as per PBD subject Area.
No Subject Area Documents
1 Engineering 2799
2 Earth&and planetary Sciences 686
3 Materials Science 585
4 Computer Science 343
5 Environmental Science 242
6 Social Sciences 210
7 Mathematics 173
8 Physics and Astronomy 156
9 Energy 143
10 Agricultural and Biological Sciences 137
11 Chemistry 113
12 Chemical Engineering 55
13 Arts and Humanities 50
14 Business, Managment and Accounting 29
15 Medicine 12
16 Decision Sciences 8
17 Multidisciplinary 8
18 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4
19 Health Professions 4
20 Psychology 3
21 Neuroscience 1
Table 9. The 30 most productive countries/territories in PBD research and overall citation as of Sep 27th 2023 in Scopus Database.
Table 9. The 30 most productive countries/territories in PBD research and overall citation as of Sep 27th 2023 in Scopus Database.
No Country Total cited Documents Grande Total Citation
1 United States 1076 18160
2 China 393 3680
3 Canada 263 4546
4 United Kingdom 252 4031
5 Italy 242 4676
6 Japan 238 2472
7 Iran 196 2582
8 India 161 1332
9 Australia 126 2314
10 Greece 96 2190
11 Turkey 93 842
12 South Korea 79 735
13 New Zealand 67 1463
14 Germany 64 460
15 Taiwan 63 669
16 France 55 904
17 Portugal 45 791
18 Switzerland 43 699
19 Sweden 38 491
20 Spain 36 500
21 Belgium 35 366
22 Singapore 31 887
23 Netherlands 29 315
24 Brazil 25 434
25 Indonesia 23 37
26 Israel 23 361
27 Egypt 22 97
28 Denmark 21 146
29 Chile 20 272
30 Mexico 20 266
Table 10. The 30 most productive research institutions in the PBD subject area vs Documents whole institution and affiliation re-search work.
Table 10. The 30 most productive research institutions in the PBD subject area vs Documents whole institution and affiliation re-search work.
No Affiliation details Affiliation ID Documents, whole institution Documents, affiliation only Authors Documents by subject area Total documents by subject area Country
1 Tongji University 60073652 135,714 124,656 39,168 Engineering 55678 China
2 The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 60008928 96,466 94,715 17,143 Engineering 38,360 China
3 National Technical University of Athens 60002947 48,354 47,093 8,546 Engineering 21353 Greece
4 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 60025778 382,167 313,616 52,476 Engineering 52,549 United States
5 Sapienza Università di Roma 60032350 216,532 213,139 39,203 Engineering 27,202 Italy
6 University of Canterbury 60020585 38,338 38,260 7,235 Engineering 7274 New Zealand
7 University of California, Berkeley 60025038 302,245 295,744 44,499 Engineering 68,429 United States
8 The University of Edinburgh 60027272 189,664 168,191 24,736 Engineering 15254 Scotland
9 Kyoto University 60011001 270,212 253,270 44,180 Engineering 41751 Japan
10 The University of British Columbia 60010365 253,824 236,085 46,569 Engineering 25983 Canada
11 Lehigh University 60000060 30,416 30,090 6,721 Engineering 10248 United States
12 Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II 60017293 140,638 136,179 23,800 Engineering 23,498 Italy
13 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 60000745 254,617 250,028 48,562 Engineering 53952 United States
14 State Key Laboratory of Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering 60129231 6,045 6,045 881 Engineering 4997 China
15 Colorado State University 60009226 90,332 84,786 18,420 Engineering 11360 United States
16 The University of Queensland 60031004 195,229 194,031 32,238 Engineering 20433 Australia
17 The University of Sheffield 60001881 133,397 126,273 21,172 Engineering 25057 United Kingdom
18 Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China 60001604 779,855 708,010 30,192 Engineering 220842 China
19 Georgia Institute of Technology 60019647 145,588 141,976 22,729 Engineering 63,489 United States
20 Texas A&M University 60020547 205,522 186,581 36,030 Engineering 45,214 United States
21 Sharif University of Technology 60027666 36,913 36,678 8,684 Engineering 18,602 Iran
22 University of Washington 60015481 346,158 307,146 53,718 Engineering 27,287 United States
23 Oregon State University 60013402 82,314 81,394 17,652 Engineering 12,347 United States
24 University of Toronto 60016849 418,086 387,554 67,114 Engineering 36730 Canada
25 The University of Tokyo 60025272 390,992 348,064 59,007 Engineering 70390 Japan
26 University at Buffalo, The State University of New York 60032083 108,662 105,982 22,441 Engineering 15503 United States
27 Arup Group Limited 60099927 3,822 2,857 1,669 Engineering 2012 United Kingdom
28 Stanford University 60012708 383,381 281,197 40,435 Engineering 49671 United States
29 ETH Zürich 60025858 189,606 187,152 34,770 Engineering 39397 Switzerland
30 Johns Hopkins University 60005248 367,944 191,956 26,923 Engineering 20117 United States

References

  1. M. El Hilali, Y. Timoulali, S. Sassioui, and B. Taj, “Seismic vulnerability assessment of existing buildings in the Tetouan city, northern Morocco,” Bull. l’Institut Sci. Sect. Sci. la Terre, no. 45, pp. 1–13, 2023. http://www.israbat.ac.ma/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/El_Hilali_et_al._BIS_45_%20ST_2023.pdf.
  2. K. El Bairi, O. Al Jarroudi, and S. Afqir, “Correspondence Morocco earthquake : mitigating the impact,” Lancet, vol. 6736, no. 23, p. 6736, 2023. [CrossRef]
  3. J. J. Zhao, Q. Chen, Y. H. Yang, and Q. Xu, “Coseismic Faulting Model and Post-Seismic Surface Motion of the 2023 Turkey–Syria Earthquake Doublet Revealed by InSAR and GPS Measurements,” Remote Sens., vol. 15, no. 13, 2023. [CrossRef]
  4. T. Nishikawa, S. Ide, and T. Nishimura, “A review on slow earthquakes in the Japan Trench,” Prog. Earth Planet. Sci., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–51, 2023. [CrossRef]
  5. Ohnuma et al., “Associations between media exposure and mental health among children and parents after the Great East Japan Earthquake,” Eur. J. Psychotraumatol., vol. 14, no. 1, 2023. [CrossRef]
  6. H.-Y. Y. Zhang et al., Design Procedures for the Use of Composites in Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Structures: State-of-the-Art Report of the RILEM Technical Committee 234-DUC, vol. 2, no. 12. 2015. https://www.rilem.net/groupe/234-duc-design-procedures-for-the-use-of-composites-in-strengthening-of-reinforced-concrete-structures-251.
  7. E. Cuenca, A. Conforti, F. Minelli, G. A. Plizzari, J. Navarro Gregori, and P. Serna, “A material-performance-based database for FRC and RC elements under shear loading,” Mater. Struct. Constr., vol. 51, no. 1, 2018. [CrossRef]
  8. M. J. Cobo, A. G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, and F. Herrera, “An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field,” J. Informetr., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 146–166, 2011. [CrossRef]
  9. G. A. Anwar, Y. Dong, and C. Zhai, “Performance-based probabilistic framework for seismic risk, resilience, and sustainability assessment of reinforced concrete structures,” Adv. Struct. Eng., vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 1454–1472, 2020. [CrossRef]
  10. D. C. Feng, S. C. Xie, J. Xu, and K. Qian, “Robustness quantification of reinforced concrete structures subjected to progressive collapse via the probability density evolution method,” Eng. Struct., vol. 202, no. October 2019, p. 109877, 2020. [CrossRef]
  11. S. C. Alih and M. Vafaei, “Performance of reinforced concrete buildings and wooden structures during the 2015 Mw 6.0 Sabah earthquake in Malaysia,” Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 102, no. April, pp. 351–368, 2019. [CrossRef]
  12. M. Afzal, Y. Liu, J. C. P. Cheng, and V. J. L. Gan, “Reinforced concrete structural design optimization: A critical review,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 260, p. 120623, 2020. [CrossRef]
  13. Z. Alam, C. Zhang, and B. Samali, “The role of viscoelastic damping on retrofitting seismic performance of asymmetric reinforced concrete structures,” Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 223–237, 2020. [CrossRef]
  14. Noushini and A. Castel, “Performance-based criteria to assess the suitability of geopolymer concrete in marine environments using modified ASTM C1202 and ASTM C1556 methods,” Mater. Struct. Constr., vol. 51, no. 6, 2018. [CrossRef]
  15. M. R. Geiker, A. Michel, H. Stang, and M. D. Lepech, “Limit states for sustainable reinforced concrete structures,” Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 122, no. May, pp. 189–195, 2019. [CrossRef]
  16. M. Alexander and H. Beushausen, “Durability, service life prediction, and modelling for reinforced concrete structures – review and critique,” Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 122, no. May, pp. 17–29, 2019. [CrossRef]
  17. Sharma, R. K Tripathi, and G. Bhat, “Comparative performance evaluation of RC frame structures using direct displacement-based design method and force-based design method,” Asian J. Civ. Eng., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 381–394, 2020. [CrossRef]
  18. H. Beushausen, R. Torrent, and M. G. Alexander, “Performance-based approaches for concrete durability: State of the art and future research needs,” Cem. Concr. Res., vol. 119, no. January, pp. 11–20, 2019. [CrossRef]
  19. L. Li, Z. Cai, K. Yu, Y. X. Zhang, and Y. Ding, “Performance-based design of all-grade strain hardening cementitious composites with compressive strengths from 40 MPa to 120 MPa,” Cem. Concr. Compos., vol. 97, no. January, pp. 202–217, 2019. [CrossRef]
  20. P. Morandi, S. Hak, and G. Magenes, “Performance-based interpretation of in-plane cyclic tests on RC frames with strong masonry infills,” Eng. Struct., vol. 156, no. November 2017, pp. 503–521, 2018. [CrossRef]
  21. G. Solorzano and V. Plevris, “Computational intelligence methods in simulation and modeling of structures: A state-of-the-art review using bibliometric maps,” Front. Built Environ., vol. 8, no. October, pp. 1–24, 2022. [CrossRef]
  22. Siddika, M. A. Al Mamun, W. Ferdous, and R. Alyousef, “Performances, challenges and opportunities in strengthening reinforced concrete structures by using FRPs – A state-of-the-art review,” Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 111, no. March, p. 104480, 2020. [CrossRef]
  23. N. Nabid, I. Hajirasouliha, and M. Petkovski, “Adaptive low computational cost optimisation method for performance-based seismic design of friction dampers,” Eng. Struct., vol. 198, no. January, p. 109549, 2019. [CrossRef]
  24. Filiatrault, D. Perrone, R. J. Merino, and G. M. Calvi, “Performance-Based Seismic Design of Nonstructural Building Elements,” J. Earthq. Eng., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 237–269, 2021. [CrossRef]
  25. R. J. Merino, D. Perrone, and A. Filiatrault, “Consistent floor response spectra for performance-based seismic design of nonstructural elements,” Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 261–284, 2020. [CrossRef]
  26. K. Zhong, T. Lin, G. G. Deierlein, R. W. Graves, F. Silva, and N. Luco, “Tall building performance-based seismic design using SCEC broadband platform site-specific ground motion simulations,” Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 81–98, 2021. [CrossRef]
  27. B. Sangoju, R. Gopal, and B. Bhajantri H, “A review on performance-based specifications toward concrete durability,” Struct. Concr., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 2526–2538, 2021. [CrossRef]
  28. M. and Ronagh, “Plastic Hinge Length of RC Columns Subjected to Both Far-Fault and Near-Fault Ground Motions Having Forward Directivity,” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., vol. 24, no. July 2014, pp. 421–439, 2011. [CrossRef]
  29. B. Ganjavi, A. Gholamrezatabar, and I. Hajirasouliha, “Effects of soil-structure interaction and lateral design load pattern on performance-based plastic design of steel moment resisting frames,” Struct. Des. Tall Spec. Build., vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 1–15, 2019. [CrossRef]
  30. S. G. Mauro, Public Sector Performance-Based Budgeting in Italy. Springer International Publishing, 2019. [CrossRef]
  31. J. Bai, F. Cheng, S. Jin, and J. Ou, “Assessing and quantifying the earthquake response of reinforced concrete buckling-restrained brace frame structures,” Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 3847–3871, 2019. [CrossRef]
  32. E. V. Muho, J. Qian, and D. E. Beskos, A direct displacement-based seismic design method using a MDOF equivalent system: application to R/C framed structures, vol. 18, no. 9. Springer Netherlands, 2020. [CrossRef]
  33. G. A. Anwar and Y. Dong, “Seismic resilience of retrofitted RC buildings,” Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 561–571, 2020. [CrossRef]
  34. M. Roohi and E. M. Hernandez, “Performance-based post-earthquake decision making for instrumented buildings,” J. Civ. Struct. Heal. Monit., vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 775–792, 2020. [CrossRef]
  35. H. Guo, Y. Dong, and X. Gu, “Durability assessment of reinforced concrete structures considering global warming: A performance-based engineering and experimental approach,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 233, p. 117251, 2020. [CrossRef]
  36. V. M. Soto Francés, A. B. Serrano Lanzarote, V. Valero Escribano, and M. Navarro Escudero, “Improving schools performance based on SHERPA project outcomes: Valencia case (Spain),” Energy Build., vol. 225, 2020. [CrossRef]
  37. M. Xiong and Y. Huang, “Novel perspective of seismic performance-based evaluation and design for resilient and sustainable slope engineering,” Eng. Geol., vol. 262, p. 105356, 2019. [CrossRef]
  38. P. Giannakouras and C. Zeris, “Seismic performance of irregular RC frames designed according to the DDBD approach,” Eng. Struct., vol. 182, no. November 2018, pp. 427–445, 2019. [CrossRef]
  39. C. Zhang and Y. Tian, “Simplified performance-based optimal seismic design of reinforced concrete frame buildings,” Eng. Struct., vol. 185, no. October 2018, pp. 15–25, 2019. [CrossRef]
  40. R. Bhowmik, “Keyword extraction from abstracts and titles,” Conf. Proc. - IEEE SOUTHEASTCON, pp. 610–617, 2008. [CrossRef]
  41. F. Blanco-Mesa, J. M. Merigó, and A. M. Gil-Lafuente, “Fuzzy decision making: A bibliometric-based review,” J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 2033–2050, 2017. [CrossRef]
  42. M. A. Koseoglu, R. Rahimi, F. Okumus, and J. Liu, “Bibliometric studies in tourism,” Ann. Tour. Res., vol. 61, no. 135, pp. 180–198, 2016. [CrossRef]
  43. N. Andersen, “Mapping the expatriate literature: a bibliometric review of the field from 1998 to 2017 and identification of current research fronts,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 32, no. 22, pp. 4687–4724, 2021. [CrossRef]
  44. G. K. Briones de Araluze and N. Cassinello Plaza, “Open banking: A bibliometric analysis-driven definition,” PLoS One, vol. 17, no. 10, p. e0275496, 2022. [CrossRef]
  45. N. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 133, no. April, pp. 285–296, 2021. [CrossRef]
  46. L. Waltman, N. J. van Eck, and E. C. M. Noyons, “A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks,” J. Informetr., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 629–635, 2010. [CrossRef]
  47. X. Liu, F. B. Zhan, S. Hong, B. Niu, and Y. Liu, “A bibliometric study of earthquake research: 1900-2010,” Scientometrics, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 747–765, 2012. [CrossRef]
  48. J. Bichteler and E. A. Eaton, “The combined use of bibliographic coupling and cocitation for document retrieval,” J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 278–282, 1980. [CrossRef]
  49. Marí, L. Torres, E. Oller, and C. Barris, “Performance-based slenderness limits for deformations and crack control of reinforced concrete flexural members,” Eng. Struct., vol. 187, no. December 2018, pp. 267–279, 2019. [CrossRef]
  50. L. Yan and J. Gong, “Development of displacement profiles for direct displacement based seismic design of regular reinforced concrete frame structures,” Eng. Struct., vol. 190, no. October 2018, pp. 223–237, 2019. [CrossRef]
  51. C. Bernardini, R. Maio, S. Boschi, T. M. Ferreira, R. Vicente, and A. Vignoli, “The seismic performance-based assessment of a masonry building enclosed in aggregate in Faro (Portugal) by means of a new target structural unit approach,” Eng. Struct., vol. 191, no. April, pp. 386–400, 2019. [CrossRef]
  52. M. Nahar, A. H. M. Muntasir Billah, H. R. Kamal, and K. Islam, “Numerical seismic performance evaluation of concrete beam-column joint reinforced with different super elastic shape memory alloy rebars,” Eng. Struct., vol. 194, no. October 2018, pp. 161–172, 2019. [CrossRef]
  53. S. Das and S. Choudhury, “Influence of effective stiffness on the performance of RC frame buildings designed using displacement-based method and evaluation of column effective stiffness using ANN,” Eng. Struct., vol. 197, no. June, p. 109354, 2019. [CrossRef]
  54. K. Ye, Y. Xiao, and L. Hu, “A direct displacement-based design procedure for base-isolated building structures with lead rubber bearings (LRBs),” Eng. Struct., vol. 197, no. November 2018, p. 109402, 2019. [CrossRef]
  55. Hassanzadeh and S. Gholizadeh, “Collapse-performance-aided design optimization of steel concentrically braced frames,” Eng. Struct., vol. 197, no. July, p. 109411, 2019. [CrossRef]
  56. Passoni, J. Guo, C. Christopoulos, A. Marini, and P. Riva, “Design of dissipative and elastic high-strength exoskeleton solutions for sustainable seismic upgrades of existing RC buildings,” Eng. Struct., vol. 221, no. June, p. 111057, 2020. [CrossRef]
  57. N. Güneş and Z. Ç. Ulucan, “Collapse probability of code-based design of a seismically isolated reinforced concrete building,” Structures, vol. 33, no. June, pp. 2402–2412, 2021. [CrossRef]
  58. V. Mohsenian, N. Gharaei-Moghaddam, and I. Hajirasouliha, “Reliability analysis and multi-level response modification factors for buckling restrained braced frames,” J. Constr. Steel Res., vol. 171, p. 106137, 2020. [CrossRef]
  59. S. Jin and J. Gong, “Damage performance based seismic capacity and fragility analysis of existing concrete containment structure subjected to near fault ground motions,” Nucl. Eng. Des., vol. 360, no. July 2019, p. 110478, 2020. [CrossRef]
  60. M. Francini, S. Gaudio, A. Palermo, and M. F. Viapiana, “A performance-based approach for innovative emergency planning,” Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 53, p. 101906, 2020. [CrossRef]
  61. N. Elhami Khorasani, T. Gernay, and C. Fang, “Parametric Study for Performance-Based Fire Design of US Prototype Composite Floor Systems,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 145, no. 5, pp. 1–15, 2019. [CrossRef]
  62. T. Deng, J. Fu, Q. Zheng, J. Wu, and Y. Pi, “Performance-Based Wind-Resistant Optimization Design for Tall Building Structures,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 145, no. 10, 2019. [CrossRef]
  63. Miano, H. Sezen, F. Jalayer, and A. Prota, “Performance-Based Assessment Methodology for Retrofit of Buildings,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 145, no. 12, 2019. [CrossRef]
  64. Y. Zhang, H. V. Burton, M. Shokrabadi, and J. W. Wallace, “Seismic Risk Assessment of a 42-Story Reinforced Concrete Dual-System Building Considering Mainshock and Aftershock Hazard,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 145, no. 11, 2019. [CrossRef]
  65. P. Steneker, A. Filiatrault, L. Wiebe, and D. Konstantinidis, “Integrated Structural–Nonstructural Performance-Based Seismic Design and Retrofit Optimization of Buildings,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 146, no. 8, pp. 1–13, 2020. [CrossRef]
  66. C. C. Harrington and A. B. Liel, “Evaluation of Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frame Buildings with Retrofitted Columns,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 146, no. 11, pp. 1–14, 2020. [CrossRef]
  67. J. Wang, T. Guo, L. Song, and Y. Song, “Performance-Based Seismic Design of RC Moment Resisting Frames with Friction-Damped Self-Centering Tension Braces,” J. Earthq. Eng., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1723–1742, 2022. [CrossRef]
  68. Nuzzo, N. Caterino, and S. Pampanin, “Seismic Design Framework Based on Loss-performance Matrix,” J. Earthq. Eng., vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 4325–4345, 2022. [CrossRef]
  69. S. A. Mirfarhadi and H. E. Estekanchi, “Value based seismic design of structures using performance assessment by the endurance time method,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1397–1415, 2020. [CrossRef]
  70. H. Dong, Q. Han, C. Qiu, X. Du, and J. Liu, “Residual displacement responses of structures subjected to near-fault pulse-like ground motions,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 313–329, 2022. [CrossRef]
  71. R. J. Bathurst, T. M. Allen, Y. Miyata, S. Javankhoshdel, and N. Bozorgzadeh, “Performance-based analysis and design for internal stability of MSE walls,” Georisk, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 214–225, 2019. [CrossRef]
  72. R. Kuehnen, M. Youssef, and S. El-Fitiany, “Performance-based design of RC beams using an equivalent standard fire,” J. Struct. Fire Eng., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 98–109, 2021. [CrossRef]
  73. F. Jalayer, H. Ebrahimian, and A. Miano, “Intensity-based demand and capacity factor design: A visual format for safety checking,” Earthq. Spectra, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1952–1975, 2020. [CrossRef]
  74. Zani, A. Speroni, A. G. Mainini, M. Zinzi, L. Caldas, and T. Poli, “Customized shading solutions for complex building façades: the potential of an innovative cement-textile composite material through a performance-based generative design,” Constr. Innov., 2023. [CrossRef]
  75. T. A. Ansari and S. Jamle, “Performance Based Seismic Analysis of Regular RC Building,” Int. J. Manag. Technol. Eng., no. January, pp. 342–351, 2019. [CrossRef]
  76. Iervolino, A. Spillatura, and P. Bazzurro, “Seismic Reliability of Code-Conforming Italian Buildings,” J. Earthq. Eng., vol. 22, no. sup2, pp. 5–27, 2018. [CrossRef]
  77. T. A. Ansari and S. Jamle, “Performance Based Analysis of RC Buildings with Underground Storey Considering Soil-Structure Interaction,” Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Sci., vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 767–771, 2019. [CrossRef]
  78. Mohammadi, A. Azizinamini, L. Griffis, and P. Irwin, “Performance Assessment of an Existing 47-Story High-Rise Building under Extreme Wind Loads,” J. Struct. Eng., vol. 145, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2019. [CrossRef]
  79. D. Lee et al., “Authors : State of Practice of Performance-Based Seismic Design in Korea State of Practice of Performance-Based Seismic Design in Korea,” 2012. https://global.ctbuh.org/resources/papers/download/1992-state-of-practice-of-performance-based-seismic-design-in-korea.pdf.
  80. Barros and H. Santa-María, “Seismic design of low-rise buildings based on frequent earthquake response spectrum,” J. Build. Eng., vol. 21, pp. 366–372, 2019. [CrossRef]
  81. S. K. Kunnath, “Modeling of reinforced concrete structures for nonlinear seismic simulation,” J. Struct. Integr. Maint., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 137–149, 2018. [CrossRef]
  82. Y. Huang, H. Hu, and M. Xiong, “Performance-based seismic fragility analysis of retaining walls based on the probability density evolution method,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 103–112, 2019. [CrossRef]
  83. H. J. Hwang and H. G. Park, “Requirements of shear strength and hoops for performance-based design of interior beam-column joints,” ACI Struct. J., vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 245–256, 2019. [CrossRef]
  84. H. A. Leyva et al., “Earthquake Design of Reinforced Concrete Buildings Using NSGA-II,” Adv. Civ. Eng., vol. 2018, no. iii, 2018. [CrossRef]
  85. V. S. Ramin Taghinezhad, Arash Taghinezhad, Vahid Mahdavifar, “Evaluation of Story Drift under Pushover Analysis in Reinforced Concrete Moment Frames,” Int. J. Res. Eng., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 296–302, 2018, [Online]. Available: http://digital.ijre.org/index.php/int_j_res_eng/article/view/323.
  86. H. Ahmadie Amiri, E. Pournamazian Najafabadi, H. Esmailpur Estekanchi, and T. Ozbakkaloglu, “Performance-based seismic design and assessment of low-rise steel special moment resisting frames with block slit dampers using endurance time method,” Eng. Struct., vol. 224, no. July 2019, p. 110955, 2020. [CrossRef]
  87. G. A. Anwar, Y. Dong, and Y. Li, “Performance-based decision-making of buildings under seismic hazard considering long-term loss, sustainability, and resilience,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 454–470, 2020. [CrossRef]
  88. E. Işık, A. Büyüksaraç, Y. L. Ekinci, M. C. Aydın, and E. Harirchian, “The effect of site-specific design spectrum on earthquake-building parameters: A case study from the Marmara region (NW Turkey),” Appl. Sci., vol. 10, no. 20, pp. 1–23, 2020. [CrossRef]
  89. P. Asadi and I. Hajirasouliha, “A practical methodology for optimum seismic design of RC frames for minimum damage and life-cycle cost,” Eng. Struct., vol. 202, no. October 2019, p. 109896, 2020. [CrossRef]
  90. Bai, T. Y. Yang, and J. Ou, “Improved Performance-Based Plastic Design for RC Moment Resisting Frames: Development and a Comparative Case Study,” Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1–24, 2018. [CrossRef]
  91. Bakr and S. M. Ahmad, “A finite element performance-based approach to correlate movement of a rigid retaining wall with seismic earth pressure,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 114, no. January 2017, pp. 460–479, 2018. [CrossRef]
  92. Basaglia, A. Aprile, E. Spacone, and F. Pilla, “Performance-based Seismic Risk Assessment of Urban Systems,” Int. J. Archit. Herit., vol. 12, no. 7–8, pp. 1131–1149, 2018. [CrossRef]
  93. S. B. Behesthi Aval, V. Mohsenian, and H. Sadegh Kouhestani, “Seismic performance-based assessment of tunnel form building subjected to near- and far-fault ground motions,” Asian J. Civ. Eng., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 79–92, 2018. [CrossRef]
  94. S. Bianchi, J. Ciurlanti, and S. Pampanin, “Comparison of traditional vs low-damage structural and non-structural building systems through a cost/performance-based evaluation,” Earthq. Spectra, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 366–385, 2021. [CrossRef]
  95. . M. M. Billah and M. S. Alam, “Performance-based prioritisation for seismic retrofitting of reinforced concrete bridge bent,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 929–949, 2014. [CrossRef]
  96. Lamperti Tornaghi, A. Loli, and P. Negro, “Balanced evaluation of structural and environmental performances in building design,” Buildings, vol. 8, no. 4, 2018. [CrossRef]
  97. Casapulla, A. Maione, and L. U. Argiento, “Performance-based Seismic Analysis of Rocking Masonry Façades Using Non-linear Kinematics with Frictional Resistances: A Case Study,” Int. J. Archit. Herit., vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1349–1363, 2021. [CrossRef]
  98. Grubišić, J. Ivošević, and A. Grubišić, “Reliability analysis of reinforced concrete frame by Finite Element Method with implicit limit state functions,” Buildings, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1–22, 2019. [CrossRef]
  99. P. Ülker, M. Ülker, and K. Karamustafa, “Bibliometric analysis of bibliometric studies in the field of tourism and hospitality,” J. Hosp. Tour. Insights, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 797–818, 2023. [CrossRef]
  100. Y. W. Chang, M. H. Huang, and C. W. Lin, “Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses,” Scientometrics, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 2071–2087, 2015. [CrossRef]
  101. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 133, no. April, pp. 285–296, 2021. [CrossRef]
  102. Leydesdorff, “Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences,” J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 418–427, 1997. [CrossRef]
  103. . van Eck and L. Waltman, “{VOSviewer} manual,” Leiden: Univeristeit Leiden, no. January, 2013, [Online]. Available: http://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.1.pdf.
  104. QIN HE, “Knowledge Discovery Through Co-Word Analysis,” Libr. Trends, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 133–159, 1999. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/items/8226.
  105. J. J. Nájera-Sánchez, E. M. Mora-Valentín, M. Ortiz-De-Urbina-Criado, and P. Moura-Díez, “Mapping the conceptual structure of environmental management: A co-word analysis,” Bus. Theory Pract., vol. 20, pp. 69–80, 2019. [CrossRef]
  106. Singleton, “Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis; from the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics,” Learn. Publ., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 267–268, 2010. [CrossRef]
  107. J. B. Slyder et al., “Citation pattern and lifespan: A comparison of discipline, institution, and individual,” Scientometrics, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 955–966, 2011. [CrossRef]
  108. W. Q. de F. Cavalcante, A. Coelho, and C. M. Bairrada, “Sustainability and tourism marketing: A bibliometric analysis of publications between 1997 and 2020 using vosviewer software,” Sustain., vol. 13, no. 9, 2021. [CrossRef]
  109. yueh Tsay, “A bibliometric analysis and comparison on three information science journals: JASIST, IPM, JOD, 1998-2008,” Scientometrics, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 591–606, 2011. [CrossRef]
Preprints 142059 g001
Figure 1. The total strength of the co-authorship links with other countries.
Figure 1. The total strength of the co-authorship links with other countries.
Preprints 142059 g001
Preprints 142059 g002
Figure 2. Visualized Co-occurrence -All keywords Analysis Overall Result.
Figure 2. Visualized Co-occurrence -All keywords Analysis Overall Result.
Preprints 142059 g002
Preprints 142059 g003
Figure 3. Visualized Co-occurrence -All keywords Analysis Result.
Figure 3. Visualized Co-occurrence -All keywords Analysis Result.
Preprints 142059 g003
Preprints 142059 g004
Figure 4. Close-up view to Category -II Co-occurrence -All keywords case -1 (A) Top-left quadrant. (B) Top-right quadrant. (C) Bottom-left quadrant. (D) Bottom-right quadrant.
Figure 4. Close-up view to Category -II Co-occurrence -All keywords case -1 (A) Top-left quadrant. (B) Top-right quadrant. (C) Bottom-left quadrant. (D) Bottom-right quadrant.
Preprints 142059 g004
Preprints 142059 g005
Figure 5. Close-up view and Visualization of Co-occurrence -Author keywords.
Figure 5. Close-up view and Visualization of Co-occurrence -Author keywords.
Preprints 142059 g005
Preprints 142059 g006
Figure 6. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Author keywords Overall Result.
Figure 6. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Author keywords Overall Result.
Preprints 142059 g006
Preprints 142059 g007
Figure 7. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Index keyword Bibliometric map.
Figure 7. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Index keyword Bibliometric map.
Preprints 142059 g007
Preprints 142059 g008
Figure 8. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Index Bibliometric map of keyword. The text of the items is only shown for the keywords with 200 occurrences or more. The co-occurrence connectivity line is only rendered if the value is higher than 10 for the year 2010 -2018.
Figure 8. Visualisation of Co-occurrence -Index Bibliometric map of keyword. The text of the items is only shown for the keywords with 200 occurrences or more. The co-occurrence connectivity line is only rendered if the value is higher than 10 for the year 2010 -2018.
Preprints 142059 g008
Preprints 142059 g009
Figure 9. Visualization of Citation – Document Analysis for the year 2002 – 2010.
Figure 9. Visualization of Citation – Document Analysis for the year 2002 – 2010.
Preprints 142059 g009
Preprints 142059 g010
Figure 10. Visualization of Citation – Source’s analysis for the year 2010 to 2020.
Figure 10. Visualization of Citation – Source’s analysis for the year 2010 to 2020.
Preprints 142059 g010
Preprints 142059 g011
Figure 11. Visualization of Citation – Author’s Analysis.
Figure 11. Visualization of Citation – Author’s Analysis.
Preprints 142059 g011
Preprints 142059 g012
Figure 12. Visualization of Citation – Countries for the year 2012 to 2018.
Figure 12. Visualization of Citation – Countries for the year 2012 to 2018.
Preprints 142059 g012
Preprints 142059 g013
Figure 13. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1 .
Figure 13. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1 .
Preprints 142059 g013
Preprints 142059 g014aPreprints 142059 g014b
Figure 14. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Figure 14. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Preprints 142059 g014aPreprints 142059 g014b
Preprints 142059 g015
Figure 15. Bibliographic coupling – sources Analysis.
Figure 15. Bibliographic coupling – sources Analysis.
Preprints 142059 g015
Preprints 142059 g016aPreprints 142059 g016b
Figure 16. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Figure 16. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Preprints 142059 g016aPreprints 142059 g016b
Preprints 142059 g017
Figure 17. Bibliographic coupling – Organization’s analysis result for the year 2010 -2020.
Figure 17. Bibliographic coupling – Organization’s analysis result for the year 2010 -2020.
Preprints 142059 g017
Preprints 142059 g018
Figure 18. Visualization of Bibliographic coupling – countries.
Figure 18. Visualization of Bibliographic coupling – countries.
Preprints 142059 g018
Preprints 142059 g019
Figure 19. Visualization of Co-citation –cited references.
Figure 19. Visualization of Co-citation –cited references.
Preprints 142059 g019
Preprints 142059 g020
Figure 20. Visualization of Co-citation –cited source.
Figure 20. Visualization of Co-citation –cited source.
Preprints 142059 g020
Preprints 142059 g021
Figure 21. Visualization of Co-citation –cited author.
Figure 21. Visualization of Co-citation –cited author.
Preprints 142059 g021
Preprints 142059 g022aPreprints 142059 g022b
Figure 22. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Figure 22. Close-up view to the Category -IV Bibliographic coupling – Document’s case -1. (a) Top-left quadrant. (b) Top-right quadrant. (c) Bottom-left quadrant. (d) Bottom-right quadrant.
Preprints 142059 g022aPreprints 142059 g022b
Preprints 142059 g023
Figure 23. The annual and cumulative numbers of research articles on PBD indexed in Scopus Before 1981 until 2023.
Figure 23. The annual and cumulative numbers of research articles on PBD indexed in Scopus Before 1981 until 2023.
Preprints 142059 g023
Table 1. Verified selected authors.
Table 1. Verified selected authors.
Id Author Documents Citation
474 Chow w.k. 6 118
489 Chuang w.-c.; Spence s.m.j. 5 83
1000 Hamburger r.o. 5 6
2547 Suksuwan a.; Spence s.m.j. 6 45
2665 Tort c.; hajjar j.f. 6 18
2771 Wang a.j. 5 17
2811 Wang y.; rosowsky d.v. 5 27
Table 2. Documents as per Document type.
Table 2. Documents as per Document type.
No Document Type Total No. of Document
1 Article 1894
2 Conference Paper 1311
3 Book Chapter 126
4 Review 81
5 Conference Review 26
6 Book 21
7 Editorial 7
8 Erratum 3
9 Note 3
10 Short Survey 2
Table 3. List of the 30 most prolific authors in the PBD research area.
Table 3. List of the 30 most prolific authors in the PBD research area.
No Author Scopus Author ID Year of 1st publication TP h-index TC Current affiliation Country
1 Chow, W. K. 7402281035
 1985 629 43 8,503 The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, China
2 Spence, Seymour M.J. 24723343400
 2008 89 21 1377 Info
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor		 United States
3 Lagaros, Nikos D. 6603320949 1996 210 37 4510 National Technical University of Athens, Greece
4 van de Lindt, John W. 6701580121 1996 366 44 6310 Info
Colorado State University, Fort Collins		 United States
5 Rosowsky, David V. 7005964413 1991 215 40 5495 Kansas State University, Manhattan, United States
6 Hajirasouliha, Iman 56016637100 2005 197 34 3790 The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
7 Gholizadeh, Saeed 8923656700 2003 64 26 1593 Urmia University, Urmia, Iran
8 Ricles, James M. 7006226161 1982 254 56 9704 Lehigh University, Bethlehem United States
9 Sause, Richard S. 7004943075
 1984 251 52 9231 Lehigh University, Bethlehem, United States
10 Christopoulos, Constantin 56846909500 2002 130 33 5242 University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
11 Papadrakakis, Manolis 7006108469 1980 267 47 6927 National Technical University of Athens, Greece
12 Pei, Shiling 16031485700
 2006 146 26 2407 Colorado School of Mines, Golden United States
13 Behnam, Behrouz 55624757300
 2012 51 12 450 Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran Iran
14 Beskos, Dimitrios E. 7006728767 1972 282 51 9252 University of Patras, Rio, Greece
15 Gernay, Thomas 36460936600 2010 90 19 1315 Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States
16 Petrini, Francesco 16304828000
 2007 71 19 1584 Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome Italy
17 Torero, José Luis 7004558676
 1993 324 46 7242 University College London. United Kingdom
18 Alam, Shahria Shahria 12241979000 2003 293 44 6688 The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
19 Choudhury, Satyabrata S. 56704402900 2011 48 7 160 National Institute of Technology Silchar, Silchar, India
20 Pampanin, Stefano 7801638248 1999 247 41 6778 University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
21 Kareem, Ahsan 35613461600 1979 454 66 14268 University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame United States
22 Bontempi, Franco 25921277100 1991 99 21 1343 Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome, Italy
23 Ciampoli, Marcello 7003543802 1992 39 14 939 Sapienza Università di Roma, Rome Italy
24 Klemencic, Ron 16319078800 1995 40 10 348 Magnusson Klemencic Associates, Seattle, United States
25 Pezeshk, Shahram 57203252619 1988 119 23 2204 University of Memphis, Memphis, United States
26 Alipour, Alice A. 56414498100 2009 83 24 1709 Iowa State University, Ames, United States
27 Estekanchi, Homayoon E. 6602609481
 1995 113 26 2050 Sharif University of Technology, Tehran Iran
28 Foschi, Ricardo O. 7006695812 1969 100 25 2000 The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
29 Hidalgo, Juan Patricio 56903753000 2015 50 14 644 The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
30 Lavan, Oren 8700916800 2005 107 28 1834 Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Table 5. The top 22 most productive journals on PBD research with their most cited article.
Table 5. The top 22 most productive journals on PBD research with their most cited article.
Journal Total Publication (TP) (%) Total Citation (TC) Total Publication
(TP)in Engineering subject area 		Cite Score 2023 The most cited article (reference) No of times cited Publisher
Engineering Structures 1569 52429 153 9.2 Novel visual crack width measurement based on backbone double-scale features for improved detection automation 70 Elsevier Ltd
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 255 4166 81 6.6 Reinforced moment-resisting glulam bolted connection with coupled long steel rod with screwheads for modern timber frame structures 16 John Wiley and Sons Ltd
Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 587 13787 61 7.5 Near-fault pulse seismic ductility spectra for bridge columns based on machine learning 34 Elsevier Ltd
Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering 252 118 56 0.4 Seismic Response of Masonry Building Aggregates in Historic Centres: Observations, Analyses and Tests 6 Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 485 14326 49 7.3 Self-centring damper with multi-energy-dissipation mechanisms: Insights and structural seismic demand perspective 35 Elsevier Ltd
Procedia Engineering 399 23216 48 4 Wildland Forest Fire Smoke Detection Based on Faster R-CNN using Synthetic Smoke Images 182 Elsevier Ltd
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 265 8102 45 8.3 Seismic fragility assessment of geotechnical seismic isolation (GSI) for bridge configuration 18 Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
Fire Safety Journal 206 4168 45 5.7 Residual compressive strength of concrete after exposure to high temperatures: A review and probabilistic models 4 Elsevier Ltd
Journal of Structural Engineering 225 7932 42 6.5 Stub Column Behavior of Concrete-Filled Cold-Formed Steel Semi-Oval Sections 22 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 5117 8255 41 0.7 Performance of RCC Column Retrofitted with CFRP Wrappings and the Wrappings with Steel Angle-Batten Jacketing Under Blast Loading 15 Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH
Journal of Earthquake Engineering 256 3175 40 5.1 Improved Hybrid Method for the Generation of Ground Motions Compatible with the Multi-Damping Design Spectra 18 Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings 51 1885 38 5.4 Numerical analysis on mechanical behavior of steel-concrete composite beams under fire 2 John Wiley and Sons Ltd
Structures 1544 15378 36 4.7 Efficient training of two ANNs using four meta-heuristic algorithms for predicting the FRP strength 95 Elsevier Ltd
Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe 91 496 35 0.8 41st Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, eCAADe 2023 0 Education and research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe
Journal of Building Engineering 2345 38856 34 8.3 Self-centring hybrid-steel-frames employing energy dissipation sequences: Insights and inelastic seismic demand model 43 Elsevier Ltd
Journal of structural Engineering 258 3175 33 5.1 Improved Hybrid Method for the Generation of Ground Motions Compatible with the Multi-Damping Design Spectra 18 Taylor and Francis Ltd.
Geotechnical Special Publication 436 1194 30 0.8 Durability and recuperative properties of lime stabilized soils 2 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Advances in Structural Engineering 171 4545 27 4.6 Experimental investigation on the bond performance of sea sand coral concrete with FRP bar reinforcement for marine environments 31 SAGE Publications Inc.
ACI Structural Journal 97 1815 25 3.3 Transition between Shear and Punching in Reinforced Concrete Slabs: Review and Predictions with ACI Code Expressions 4 American Concrete Institute
Earthquake and Structures 48 1253 21 3.2 Simplified analytical solution of tunnel cross section under oblique incident SH wave in layered ground 2 Techno-Press
Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 81 2430 21 4.8 A State-of-the-Practice Review of Three-Dimensional Laser Scanning Technology for Tunnel Distress Monitoring 8 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Earthquake Spectra 98 3208 20 7.1 Multi-criteria decision-making approach for optimal seismic/energy retrofitting of existing buildings 7 SAGE Publications Inc.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated