MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987962436 · doi:10.1139/t00-103

Consolidation modelling of soils under the test embankment at Chek Lap Kok International Airport in Hong Kong using a simplified finite element method

2001· article· en· W1987962436 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guofu Zhu, Jian‐Hua Yin, J. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsolidation (business)Geotechnical engineeringLeveePore water pressureFinite element methodHydraulic conductivitySoil waterSettlement (finance)GeologyEngineeringCivil engineeringStructural engineeringSoil scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper models consolidation of the foundation soils under a test embankment at the new Chek Lap Kok International Airport in Hong Kong. The modelling used a simplified finite element method and material parameters derived from results in the original site investigation report. Various features that need to be considered in applying the simplified method are illustrated through this case study. Good predictions of settlement results are obtained. Relatively large discrepancies in pore-water pressure predictions suggest that the nonlinear nature of hydraulic conductivity needs to be taken into account when large compressions are likely to occur. Geological conditions are shown to be a key factor in successful modelling of consolidation behaviour.Key words: consolidation, pore-water pressure, case modelling, finite element method, vertical drains, settlement.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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