MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032100242 · doi:10.1680/geng.2009.162.1.21

Soil improvement works for an offshore land reclamation

2009· article· en· W2032100242 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Chu, M. W. Bo, Arul Arulrajah

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Geotechnical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsNorthern Ontario Academic Medicine Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand reclamationConsolidation (business)Submarine pipelineIntertidal zoneGeotechnical engineeringSeabedEnvironmental scienceGeologyGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Changi East reclamation project was carried out in five phases along the foreshore of the east coast of Singapore. The water depths in the reclaimed area ranged from 5 to 15 m. The project involved hydraulic placement of 272 million m3 of sand onto soft seabed marine clay up to 50 m thick. A linear total of 170,000 km of prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs) were installed for accelerating the consolidation process of the underlying soft marine clay. The soil improvement works covered a total area of approximately 1200 ha. In this paper, the site conditions and the soil improvement works adopted are described. Pilot tests with full-scale field instrumentations as well as laboratory and in situ tests were carried out to verify the design, check the effectiveness of the soil improvement works using PVDs, and establish the most suitable drain spacing. Field monitoring data obtained from both the pilot tests and the reclamation works are presented and interpreted. Degree of consolidation was calculated based on both settlement and pore pressure data.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations62
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207