Refinement of K-stiffness Method for geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls
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
The K-stiffness Method is an empirically-developed working stress method used to compute reinforcement loads for the internal stability design of geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls under serviceability conditions. In this paper, additional data from Japanese case studies for five full-scale field and three full-scale laboratory geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls are added to the database that was used to calibrate the original K-stiffness Method. One more case study from an instrumented wall in the USA is also introduced. Measured loads are compared with predicted loads using the current AASHTO Simplified Method and a modified version of the K-stiffness Method that has been adjusted by back-fitting model parameters to the extended database. The AASHTO Simplified Method is shown to be excessively conservative (on average) with respect to accurate prediction of reinforcement loads and to correlate poorly with measured values. The modified K-stiffness Method is demonstrated by statistical analysis to give ratios (bias) of average measured to predicted reinforcement load values close to 1 and coefficient of variation (COV) values for the maximum reinforcement load in a wall that are less than 25%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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