Fundamental factors affecting liquefaction susceptibility of sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liquefaction phenomena in saturated sands are examined. Fundamental factors that influence liquefaction susceptibility are considered from the background of comprehensive experimental evidence from test results on reconstituted specimens. These include those related to the loading system characteristics which do not enable measurements of the true post-peak behaviour. In particular, several issues related to the influence of initial state variables, on which there appears to be a lack of consensus in the literature, are dealt with. It is shown that at identical initial void ratio - effective stress state, undrained (constant volume) behaviour is profoundly affected by the fabric that ensues upon sample reconstitution. Very loose moist-tamped states are unlikely to be accessible to in situ sands. The susceptibility to liquefaction, both static and cyclic, is not only dependent on the initial state variables, but is also strongly affected by the effective stress path during undrained shear. Comparative tests on undisturbed samples retrieved by in situ ground freezing and their reconstituted counterparts show that water-pluviated specimens closely mimic the behaviour of in situ sands. Very small expansive volumetric strains due to pore-pressure gradients during short-duration loading, or after its cessation, could transform a sand into a strain-softening type, which otherwise would be dilative if completely undrained.Key words: anisotropy, laboratory tests, liquefaction, sampling, sands, shear strength.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".