## 4 Examples
### Three-Bay Ten-Story Framework
#### 4.2.1 Parameter Tuning in PFAM for the Three-Bay Ten-Story Framework  
To study PFAM's performance for the three-bay ten-story framework, a similar sensitivity analysis to the previous one was performed considering different values for a pair of parameters. With EEP2 semi-rigid connections, and initial constant values \(\beta_{0}=1\), \(m=2\), \(\gamma_{0}=10\), \(\alpha_{0}=1\), and \(t_{c}=0.1\), the values of the \(nt\) and \(k_{max}\) parameters were modified. Based on the results from the previous example, a wide range of values for the \(nt\) parameter and only three values for the \(k_{max}\) parameter were considered. There were 50 independent runs. The accuracy results are shown in Table 31, and the standard deviation results are shown in Table 32.  
In Table 31, the maximum accuracy values have been highlighted in bold, as have the minimum values of standard deviation in Table 32. The values of parameters \(nt=1000\) and \(k_{max}=100\) gave good results and had a low computational cost, so they were chosen for the following sensitivity calculation. With EEP2 semi-rigid connections, and constant values \(\beta_{0}=1\), \(nt=1000\), \(k_{max}=100\), \(\gamma_{0}=10\), and \(\alpha_{0}=1\), the values of the \(t_{c}\) and \(m\) parameters were modified. Taking the information above into account, sufficiently wide ranges of the \(t_{c}\) and \(m\) parameters were considered. The accuracy results are shown in Table 33, and the standard deviation results are shown in Table 34.  
In Table 33, the maximum accuracy values have been highlighted in bold, as have the minimum values of standard deviation in Table 34. Parameter values \(t_{c}=0.1\) and \(m=1\), or \(m=2\) had good and similar results, so they were chosen for the following sensitivity calculation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\(k_{max}\)} \\ \cline{3-5}  & & **100** & **200** & **300** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{_nt_} & 500 & 0.970802 & 0.985971 & 0.988744 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 600 & 0.983134 & 0.986557 & **0.991328** \\ \cline{2-5}  & 700 & 0.989667 & 0.988853 & **0.991794** \\ \cline{2-5}  & 800 & 0.983148 & 0.986735 & **0.991775** \\ \cline{2-5}  & 900 & 0.985811 & **0.991861** & **0.993167** \\ \cline{2-5}  & 1000 & 0.989935 & **0.990955** & **0.990948** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 31: Three-bay ten-story framework with EEP2 semi-rigid connections. Sensitivity analysis for \(nt\) and \(k_{max}\). Accuracy. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\(m\)} \\ \cline{3-5}  & & **1** & **2** & **3** & **Mean** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{\(t_{c}\)} & 0.1 & **0.988397** & **0.987065** & 0.967465 & **0.980976** \\ \cline{2-5}  & 0.3 & 0.987863 & 0.975870 & 0.955743 & 0.973159 \\ \cline{2-5}  & 0.5 & 0.974107 & 0.964007 & 0.951925 & 0.963346 \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**mean**} & **0.9835** & 0.9756 & 0.9584 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 33: Three-bay ten-story framework with EEP2 semi-rigid connections. Sensitivity analysis for \(t_{c}\) and \(m\). Accuracy. With EEP2 semi-rigid connections, and constant values \(\beta_{0}=1\), \(nt=1000\), \(k_{max}=100\), \(t_{c}=0.1\), and \(m=1\), the values of the \(\alpha_{0}\) and \(\gamma_{0}\) parameters were modified. Taking this above information into account, sufficiently wide ranges of the \(\alpha_{0}\) and \(\gamma_{0}\) parameters were considered. The accuracy results are shown in Table 35, and the standard deviation results are shown in Table 36.  
In Table 35, the maximum accuracy values have been highlighted in bold, as have the minimum values of standard deviation in Table 36. Parameter \(\gamma_{0}\) values below 1 produced poor results regardless of the value of parameter \(\alpha_{0}\).