MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Setup Following Installation of Dynamic Anchors in Normally Consolidated Clay

2009· article· en· W1998765867 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringConsolidation (business)CentrifugePileMooringDynamic load testingSubmarine pipelineEngineeringGeologyStructural engineeringMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a series of centrifuge model tests designed to assess the increase in capacity of dynamic anchors due to setup in normally consolidated clay. The tests involved measurement of the vertical capacity of 1:200 reduced scale model anchors following various periods of postinstallation consolidation. The short-term capacity was shown to be dependent on the anchor impact velocity. Cavity expansion solutions for consolidation around a solid driven pile were found to provide agreement with the experimental results. A simplified capacity calculation technique predicted higher friction ratio values than is typically observed for driven piles; however, these calculations were complicated by the unusual dynamic anchor load–displacement response and uncertainty regarding the true sample shear strength. Dynamic anchor consolidation proceeds at a slower rate than for suction caissons and open-ended piles of similar equivalent diameter. However, the results indicate that depending on the site conditions, dynamically installed anchors remain a viable alternative to conventional deep-water mooring techniques.

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 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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.169 · 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