MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052026302 · doi:10.1680/gein.8.0194

Influence of Creep and Stress-Relaxation of Geosynthetic Reinforcement on Embankment Behaviour

2001· article· en· W2052026302 on OpenAlexafffund
A.L. Li, R. Kerry Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosynthetics International · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReinforcementCreepGeosyntheticsStiffnessGeotechnical engineeringViscoelasticityMaterials scienceStress (linguistics)PolypropyleneStress relaxationRelaxation (psychology)Structural engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of viscous behaviour of geosynthetic reinforcement on both the short-term and long-term performance of basally reinforced embankments over inviscous soft foundations are investigated. The construction of embankments reinforced with both viscous reinforcement and inviscous reinforcement is numerically simulated to identify the magnitude of creep and stress-relaxation of reinforcement under both limit-state and working stress conditions and the consequent effects on the stability and deformations of the system. The effects of viscoelastic properties of four reinforcement products made of polyester, polypropylene, and polyethylene are examined. It is shown that the viscous behavior of geosynthetic reinforcement can decrease the short-term stability, and the creep of geosynthetic reinforcement can significantly magnify the long-term shear deformations of the foundation soil. The isochronous stiffness can reasonably represent the mobilized reinforcement stiffness at the end of construction. The mobilized reinforcement stiffness and force are examined and the design considerations are discussed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations34
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosynthetics InternationalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207