MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056954066 · doi:10.1139/t07-078

Shear banding and cross-anisotropic behavior observed in laboratory sand tests with stress rotation

2008· article· en· W2056954066 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Poul V. Lade, Jungman Nam, Won Pyo Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringShear (geology)Shear stressOverburden pressurePrincipal stressMaterials scienceTriaxial shear testDirect shear testShear bandAnisotropyGeologyPlane stressComposite materialStructural engineeringEngineeringOpticsFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shear banding in Santa Monica beach sand deposited by dry pluviation in hollow cylinder specimens is studied in 34 drained torsion shear tests with rotation of principal stress directions. The effect of the specimen height on the soil behavior was investigated by testing specimens with heights of 40 and 25 cm. Each test was conducted with the same, constant inside and outside confining pressure, σ r , thus tying the value of b = (σ 2 – σ 3 )/(σ 1 – σ 3 ) to the inclination, β, of the major principal stress. Shear bands can develop freely without significant restraint from the soft rubber membranes. Strain localization and shear banding were observed in the hollow cylinder specimens, and this created failure conditions in plane strain and in tests with higher b-values. The results clearly indicate the influence of the cross-anisotropic fabric on the stress–strain behavior, on the shear band inclination, and on the shape of the failure surface.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

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

Citations84
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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