MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1951691689 · doi:10.1139/t2012-020

Coefficients of active earth pressure with seepage effect

2012· article· en· W1951691689 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pérsio L.A. Barros, Petrucio J. Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLateral earth pressureGeotechnical engineeringPore water pressureFriction angleRetaining wallGeologyThrustDrainageGroundwaterEarth (classical element)MechanicsEngineeringMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A calculation method for the active earth pressure on the possibly inclined face of a retaining wall provided with a drainage system along the soil–structure interface is presented. The soil is cohesionless and fully saturated to the ground surface. This situation may arise during heavy rainstorms. To solve the problem, the water seepage through the soil is first analyzed using a numerical procedure based on the boundary element method. Then, the obtained pore-water pressure is used in a Coulomb-type formulation, which supposes a plane failure surface inside the backfill when the wall movement is enough to put the soil mass in the active state. The formulation provides coefficients of active pressure with seepage effect which can be used to evaluate the active earth thrust on walls of any height. A series of charts with values of the coefficients of active earth pressure with seepage calculated for selected values of the soil internal friction angle, the wall–soil friction angle, and the wall face inclination is presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207