Reliability approach for the side resistance of piles by means of the total stress analysis (α Method)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evaluation of the pile–soil adhesion plays a fundamental role in the estimation of the side resistance for total stress analysis. Over the years, researchers have presented proposals for adhesion factor formulations even though only a few of them have shown a certain agreement in numerical and (or) methodological terms. Hence, several real-size experimental analyses have improved the understanding of the pile–soil adhesion phenomenon and mechanism. Nevertheless, the undrained shear strength (c u ) values depend on the experimental technique employed. Such results force engineers to make a difficult choice among various formulations. A reliability analysis is performed in this paper to take into consideration the variations in formulations and values of the side resistance of bored piles in clayey soils. This study involves piles having different lengths and diameters, which are supposed to be bored in Matera clays. Such soil is characterized by means of laboratory investigation campaign, and its mechanical and stochastic main features are reported here. Values of reliability index β are calculated by means of the first-order reliability method.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it