Centrifuge scaling laws of pile response to lateral spreading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of centrifuge tests have been conducted to study the interaction between liquefied sand under earthquake-induced lateral spreading and pile foundations. Most of those centrifuge models resemble full-scale prototypes from case histories, usually with limited field measurements, while a few of them replicate the conditions of full-scale heavily instrumented laboratory tests. This paper presents the results of centrifuge tests modelling the single pile interaction with liquefied sand conducted at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York, and their comparison with the respective large-scale prototype tests conducted at the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention in Tsukuba, Japan. A critical analysis of the scaling laws currently used for this kind of centrifuge tests is included, focusing on the use of viscous fluid for centrifuge model saturation and the validity of the centrifuge scaling laws when shear band development plays an important role in soil–structure interaction. This paper also presents recommendations for pile foundations design against the lateral pressure associated with liquefied sand under lateral spreading.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".