## 4 Examples
### Three-Bay Two-Story Framework
#### 4.1.1 Parameter Tuning in PFAM for the Three-Bay Two-Story Framework
Figure 17: Three-bay two-story framework with rigid connections. Standard deviation vs. \(t_{c}\). In Table 20, the maximum accuracy values have been highlighted in bold, as have the minimum values of standard deviation in Table 21. Parameter \(\gamma_{0}\) values above 10 produce poor results regardless of the value of parameter \(\alpha_{0}\). The best results were obtained in the \(\gamma_{0}\) range [0.1, 10] and the \(\alpha_{0}\) range [0.3, 0.5]. Figures 18-21 include the graphs of the accuracy and standard deviation means. These graphs show the sensitivity of both metrics to parameters \(\gamma_{0}\) and \(\alpha_{0}\). Some of the graphs also include linear regression analyses on the data, which helps detect trends in both metrics against changes in the value of the parameters. Figure 18 shows how the accuracy metric improves slightly when parameter \(\alpha_{0}\) decreases. Figure 20 shows similar behavior with the standard deviation metric. Figures 19 and 21 show that the accuracy and standard deviation values are reasonably good and quite similar for values of parameter \(\gamma_{0}\) below 25. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **0.1** & **1** & **10** & **25** & **50** & **75** & **100** & \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(\alpha_{0}\)} & 0.3 & **1.00000** & 0.946488 & 0.992191 & 0.910663 & 0.891969 & 0.758022 & 0.668462 & 0.881113 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.4 & **1.00000** & 0.967716 & 0.993883 & 0.882127 & 0.832489 & 0.786748 & 0.786933 & 0.892842 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.5 & **1.00000** & 0.971335 & 0.992453 & 0.943934 & 0.753382 & 0.838944 & 0.921210 & **0.917323** \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.6 & 0.971560 & 0.952837 & 0.898089 & 0.844372 & 0.708637 & 0.773464 & 0.598494 & 0.821065 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.7 & 0.997763 & 0.993318 & 0.933460 & 0.909359 & 0.779504 & 0.788907 & 0.662411 & 0.866389 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.8 & 0.997763 & 0.973706 & 0.922725 & 0.923220 & 0.887281 & 0.861669 & 0.754091 & 0.902922 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.9 & 0.970565 & 0.966832 & 0.956470 & 0.974998 & 0.883387 & 0.700241 & 0.827291 & 0.897112 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 1.0 & 0.939673 & 0.952912 & 0.955308 & 0.911318 & 0.808622 & 0.770159 & 0.680694 & 0.859812 \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**mean**} & **0.984665** & 0.965643 & 0.955572 & 0.912499 & 0.818159 & 0.784769 & 0.737448 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 21: Three-bay two-story framework with rigid connections. First sensitivity analysis for \(\alpha_{0}\) and \(\gamma_{0}\). Standard deviation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **0.1** & **1** & **10** & **25** & **50** & **75** & **100** & \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{\(\alpha_{0}\)} & 0.3 & **0.00** & 1128.45 & 131.15 & 1532.62 & 1684.33 & 2990.43 & 3459.81 & 1560.97 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.4 & **0.00** & 868.15 & 94.18 & 1763.05 & 2588.30 & 4499.15 & 3664.25 & 1925.30 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.5 & **0.00** & 761.60 & 97.77 & 1141.50 & 3045.85 & 2183.85 & 638.44 & **1124.15** \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.6 & 749.05 & 1244.95 & 2289.27 & 3165.81 & 4131.11 & 2993.27 & 5184.88 & 2822.62 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.7 & 62.20 & 101.90 & 1747.11 & 1915.66 & 3609.77 & 2567.04 & 4039.21 & 2006.13 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.8 & 62.20 & 686.37 & 2161.60 & 1170.22 & 1555.39 & 1829.78 & 3129.82 & 1513.62 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 0.9 & 683.55 & 856.40 & 1024.49 & 231.44 & 1627.07 & 3962.12 & 2520.01 & 1557.87 \\ \cline{2-8}  & 1.0 & 1491.07 & 1062.74 & 849.50 & 1365.04 & 2745.92 & 3131.86 & 3486.90 & 2019.00 \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**mean**} & **381.01** & 838.82 & 1049.38 & 1535.67 & 2623.47 & 3019.69 & 3265.41 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 20: Three-bay two-story framework with rigid connections. First sensitivity analysis for \(\alpha_{0}\) and \(\gamma_{0}\). Accuracy. Figure 19: Three-bay two-story framework with rigid connections. First sensitivity analysis. Accuracy vs. 70. Figure 18: Three-bay two-story framework with rigid connections. First sensitivity analysis. Accuracy vs. \(\alpha_{0}\).