Thermally induced pore pressure response in peat beneath a railway embankment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of a study investigating the behavior of peat subgrade beneath a railway embankment. Instrumentation was installed to measure the temperature, pore water pressure, and vertical settlement at different depths within peat strata over a 3-year period. The pore pressures within the peat subgrade were observed to increase significantly during the warmer months (>10 kPa) and to be strongly correlated to the seasonal changes in temperature. However, no clear correlation was found between pore pressure and settlement. Gas bubbles observed coming up through ponded surface water beside the embankment suggested that pore pressure may be a result of the expansion of gas bubbles within the peat. To confirm this hypothesis, laboratory tests were conducted. Peat specimens, kept at room temperature and in an anaerobic environment, confirmed the potential to generate gas. Further, the pore pressures of peat specimens placed within a triaxial cell apparatus with a constant applied confining pressure showed a direct correlation to incremental increases in the temperature of the specimen. Measurements showed that a 30 kPa increase in pore pressure corresponded to a 10°C increase in temperature. The results of this investigation showed the existence of gas within a peat subgrade and its effect on the pore pressure within the peat.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".