Experimental investigation of EPS geofoam seismic buffers using shaking table tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper reports the results of six shaking table tests using reduced-scale model walls constructed with expanded polystyrene (EPS) panels to reduce dynamic earth loads due to base shaking. The results are compared with a nominal identical rigid (control) wall constructed without a seismic buffer. The test results show that dynamic load attenuation increased with decreasing geofoam stiffness. The test with the highest buffer stiffness resulted in a 15% reduction in dynamic load and the test with lowest stiffness resulted in a 40% reduction in dynamic load compared with the control wall. The results of these experiments provide proof of the concept that EPS panels placed against rigid walls can act as seismic buffers to attenuate dynamic loads due to ground shaking (e.g. earthquake). Additional quantitative data related to load–deformation–time response, back-calculated elastic modulus values for the EPS seismic buffer configurations, dynamic interface shear properties, acceleration amplification in the backfill soil and post-excitation stress relaxation-creep behaviour are also reported.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".