MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mitigation of Ground Shock Effects on Buried Structures–Advantages of Unsaturated Ground

2011· article· en· W2004830991 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eng‐Choon Leong, Anand Sarma, C.H. Lim

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDefence Science and Technology GroupPetroleum Technology Research Centre
KeywordsShock (circulatory)MoistureResidualEnvironmental scienceSaturation (graph theory)Geotechnical engineeringMining engineeringEngineeringGeographyMeteorologyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Going underground has been proven an effective defense strategy. However, defense structures below the ground need to be designed for ground shock loading. In Singapore, two thirds of the land area is covered by residual soils which are mostly unsaturated. But soil moisture condition in a tropical country like Singapore can alternate between dry and wet conditions. This paper summarizes the findings of a series of small-scale field tests to investigate the effects of degree of saturation on ground shock. A new perspective is presented which will help in developing technologies to mitigate ground shock effects on underground structures in future.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Mechanics and MaterialsSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207