Investigation of field-installation effects of horizontal twin-jet grouting in Shanghai soft soil deposits
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a case study of an investigation into the responses of the surrounding ground to the horizontal twin-jet grouting method (HTJGM) in soft soil deposits of Shanghai. During the field test, the variation of pore-water pressure, lateral earth pressure, lateral displacements of the subsurface soils, and ground surface heave induced by the installation of five horizontal jet-grouted columns were monitored. The monitoring results indicate that the excess pore-water pressure reached 4 to 6 times the undrained shear strength of the soils, while maximum lateral displacements and ground surface heave were up to 80 and 17 mm, respectively. The influence range due to the installation of jet-grouted columns was between 15 and 20 times the nominal column radius. The development of prediction methods for lateral displacements and ground surface heave induced by the HTJGM installation process are presented and discussed. Results from the investigation suggest that the proposed prediction methods can be used to provide reasonable estimates of ground response and influence range of horizontal jet grouting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it