## 5 Results
### Ambient Vibration Results for 2022-2023  
The following results correspond to the analysis of vibration data recorded during the 2022-2023 period, analyzed in 10 min intervals. Figure 7 presents the results obtained from the analysis of the raw data with a sampling frequency of 400 Hz using the SSI-COV method. This figure shows the stable frequencies identified for each model order, ranging from order two to twenty-four, for a scenario with four synchronized sensors and for two different tolerance cases. It is important to note that these results correspond to the X direction of the building. In both subgraphs, each point corresponds to a frequency identified at a specific model order, and the heat map color palette of the points indicates the modal participation of that frequency. It should be noted that in each individual analysis, based on 10 min segments of synchronized data, multiple stable frequencies can be found in different orders, which is essential for understanding the mode identification. The modal participation indicates how dominant or significant that frequency is in terms of its contribution to the system's dynamics. The color range in the graph, shown in the right-side color bar, visually represents this percentage, where warmer colors (reds) indicate frequencies with higher participation, while cooler colors (blues) indicate frequencies with lower significance. On the vertical axis, the frequency is represented in Hertz (Hz), while on the horizontal axis, the model order is shown. This representation facilitates the identification of stable modes and allows observations of how the dominant frequencies change as the model order increases. In this context, the tolerance values used play a significant role in determining stability. Specifically, two different tolerance configurations were applied. in the graph on the left, a more relaxed tolerance is applied, with the frequency tolerance \(f_{tol}\) set at 0.01, the damping tolerance \(\xi_{tol}\) at 0.04, and the Modal Assurance Criterion tolerance  
Figure 7: Stable frequencies in the X direction per order with 400 Hz sampling for 2022–2023 ambient vibration. (**a**) Tolerances: \(f_{tol}=0.01\), \(\zeta_{tol}=0.04\), \(MAC_{tol}=0.01\). (**b**) Tolerances: \(f_{tol}=\zeta_{tol}=MAC_{tol}=0.01\). at 0.01. Meanwhile, in the graph on the right, a stricter tolerance configuration is applied, with all three tolerances (\(f_{tol}\), \(\zeta_{tol}\), and \(MAC_{tol}\)) set at 0.01. The difference in tolerances allows an examination of the consistency of the identified frequencies. It can be observed that even with a stricter tolerance in the right graph, the resulting identified frequencies remain largely consistent with those in the left graph. This suggests that the stricter tolerance values chosen did not significantly alter the identification of dominant frequencies, implying a robust and stable system response, regardless of the applied tolerances. Analyzing different tolerance cases helps confirm the stability of the identified modes and reduces uncertainties in the results. This also suggests that the initial tolerance configuration might already be sufficiently strict for this analysis. This observation reinforces the idea that a 400 Hz sampling frequency may be excessive for the type of analysis being conducted, as it introduces high-frequency components that do not provide valuable information about the structural dynamics. This aligns with the notion that a lower sampling frequency might be more suitable, focusing on capturing the dominant modes within a lower frequency range where the actual natural frequencies of the structure are expected to reside. In essence, the presence of high-frequency data that do not correspond to relevant modes suggests that the sampling rate may be unnecessarily high, resulting in the inclusion of extraneous high-frequency information.