MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reliability Evaluation of Earth Slopes

2008· article· en· W2014274706 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringSlope stabilitySlip (aerodynamics)Reliability (semiconductor)Slope failureGeologyShear strength (soil)Slope stability analysisFactor of safetyStructural engineeringReliability engineeringEngineeringSoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reliability analysis of earth slopes is considered. For slope safety assessment, the first-order reliability method is employed for estimating the probability of failure or reliability index. Since the failure of any slip surfaces implies failure of the slope, the slope is considered as a series system. The system aspect of the slope in the reliability analysis is dealt with by defining a limit state of the system as a function of the minimum of the ratio of the shear strength to the mobilized shear strength for each of all potential slip surfaces. Such a ratio for a given slip surface is evaluated using the extended generalized method of slices. The reliability analysis procedure described is applied to example slopes to illustrate the impact of the probability distribution type, and the spatial variability of the soil properties on the probability of failure of the slopes.

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)0.001
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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