MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reinforcement Load and Compression of Reinforced Soil Mass under Surcharge Loading

2015· article· en· W2009840219 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Huabei Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlaucoma Research Society of Canada
KeywordsServiceability (structure)ReinforcementGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringCompression (physics)Reinforced solidReinforced concreteMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforced soil composites and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are frequently employed to carry large surcharge or footing loads. For the safety and serviceability of these reinforced soil structures, it is necessary to analyze the reinforcement load and compression of reinforced soil mass subjected to surcharge loading. In the research reported in this paper, an analytical method proposed by the writer was extended to meet these needs. The extended analytical method explicitly considers soil nonlinearity, soil dilatancy, soil-reinforcement interaction, and end restrictions of reinforced soil mass. Both plane-strain and triaxial stress states can be considered in the method. The applicability of the method for reinforcement load was validated against eight large-scale tests of reinforced soil mass or MSE walls, and the method for reinforced soil compression was validated against two large-scale tests. The compressions of four reinforced soil minipiers under surcharge loading were also predicted. The proposed method has the capacity to unify the analyses of reinforcement load and compression of a reinforced soil mass under low to medium surcharge loading. Some issues in the application of the proposed method are also discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207