MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031112711 · doi:10.1680/geot.2001.51.3.197

Natural slopes and cuts: movement and failure mechanisms

2001· article· en· W2031112711 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

VenueGéotechnique · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringGeologySlope failureLandslideContext (archaeology)Natural (archaeology)CreepEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Movements and failure of cuts and natural slopes constitute an important geotechnical problem that involves a variety of geomaterials in a variety of geological and climatic contexts, and which has a major socio-economic impact in many countries. The paper reviews the state of knowledge in this domain, examining the basic aspects of soil mechanics that are relevant to the context of slopes, the importance of water on slope behaviour, and then the different stages of slope movements: pre-failure, failure, post-failure and reactivation. Finally it is shown how the geotechnical characterisation of slope movements can be used, in particular for assessing risk associated with such movements. Emphasis is put on for the brittleness of soils and its practical implications for the progressive failure developing at the pre-failure stage and on the characteristics of post-failure movements. The influence of other factors such as creep, fatigue, destructuration, partial saturation and infiltration is also considered.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.185 · 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