The 2001 R.M. Hardy Lecture: The limits of limit equilibrium analyses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limit equilibrium types of analysis have been in use in geotechnical engineering for a long time and are now used routinely in geotechnical engineering practice. Modern graphical software tools have made it possible to gain a much better understanding of the inner numerical details of the method. A closer look at the details reveals that the limit equilibrium method of slices has some serious limitations. The fundamental shortcoming of limit equilibrium methods, which only satisfy equations of statics, is that they do not consider strain and displacement compatibility. This limitation can be overcome by using finite element computed stresses inside a conventional limit equilibrium framework. From the finite element stresses both the total shear resistance and the total mobilized shear stress on a slip surface can be computed and used to determine the factor of safety. Software tools that make this feasible and practical are now available, and they hold great promise for advancing the technology of analyzing the stability of earth structures.Key words: limit equilibrium, stability, factor of safety, finite element, ground stresses, slip surface.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it