MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040139046 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0080

Thirty-Sixth Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: Advances in visualization of geotechnical processes through digital image correlation

2015· article· en· W2040139046 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
W. Andy Take

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringDigital image correlationLandslideGeotechnical investigationFoundation (evidence)GeologyVisualizationEngineeringGeographyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital image correlation (DIC) is an image-processing technique that calculates fields of incremental displacement by comparing two digital images and locating numerous small regions in both images to high subpixel accuracy. This technique is particularly well suited to the visualization of geotechnical failure processes such as the plastic collapse of a shallow foundation or the evolution of failure within a physical model landslide as it can yield full-field displacements at high spatial and temporal resolution. The adoption of digital image correlation methods by the geotechnical engineering community over the past 15 years has therefore provided researchers with a transformative tool for the visualization of failure mechanisms and the quantification of soil and soil–structure interaction behaviour within physical model experiments. The objective of this Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium is to provide an updated review of the factors that affect accuracy and precision of the technique and to highlight selected recent advances and emerging uses of DIC in geotechnical engineering applications with particular emphasis on geotechnical physical modelling and field monitoring.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations157
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207