MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034337476 · doi:10.1139/t02-119

An anisotropic elastoplastic model for soft clays

2003· article· en· W2034337476 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simon J. Wheeler, A. Näätänen, Minna Karstunen, M. Lojander

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Glasgow
KeywordsAnisotropyGeotechnical engineeringConstitutive equationHardening (computing)Yield (engineering)Critical state soil mechanicsStress pathPlasticityMaterials scienceMechanicsGeologyStructural engineeringEngineeringFinite element methodComposite materialPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An anisotropic elastoplastic model for soft clays is presented. Experimental data from multistage drained triaxial stress path tests on Otaniemi clay from Finland provide support for the proposed shape of the yield curve and for the proposed relationship describing the change of yield curve inclination with plastic straining. Procedures are proposed for determining the initial inclination of the yield curve and the values of the two additional soil constants within the model. Comparisons of model simulations with experimental data demonstrate significant improvements in the performance of the new model over the Modified Cam Clay model. The remaining discrepancies are mainly attributable to the important role of destructuration in the sensitive Otaniemi clay.Key words: anisotropy, constitutive relations, elastoplasticity, laboratory tests, rotational hardening, soft clays.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations455
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207