Static and dynamic properties of a lightly cemented silicate-grouted sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the results of an experimental investigation on the behaviour of a lightly grouted loose medium sand under both monotonic and cyclic loading. The experimental programme in the present study was carried out on both untreated and treated sand specimens stabilized with a silica-based grout, and comprises isotropic triaxial compression tests equipped with bender elements, drained triaxial monotonic shearing tests, and undrained cyclic tests in a simple shear (SS) apparatus. The results highlight that the weak cementation level induced by chemical treatment was sufficient to moderately increase small-strain stiffness and stress–dilatancy of the grouted sand during drained monotonic shear. A small cohesion intercept was observed in the analyzed failure envelope, while cyclic liquefaction resistance exhibited a much more significant increase, with a different pattern of behaviour between low and high stress levels. Finally, undrained cyclic SS test results evidenced that silicate grout employed in this research improves undrained cyclic shear strength in a manner similar to densification of the same material up to a density index of approximately 75%.
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 | 0.001 | 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".