MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064019219 · doi:10.1139/t06-060

Implementation of the tangent modulus – vertical stress (<i>E</i><sub>t</sub>–σ<sub>v</sub>) model for flexible pavements analysis

2006· article· en· W2064019219 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
J.‐M. Konrad, Ph D Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTangentFinite element methodDeflection (physics)Tangent modulusModulusGranular materialGeotechnical engineeringConstitutive equationStress (linguistics)Structural engineeringSolverNonlinear systemTest dataElastic modulusGeologyMaterials scienceMathematicsEngineeringGeometryPhysicsComposite materialClassical mechanicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recently developed nonlinear elastic model of granular material, referred to as the tangent modulus – vertical stress (Et–σv) model, was implemented into a finite element numerical solver FlexPDE. The FlexPDE program was used to compare deflection predictions with actual plate-load test data from a site near Québec City. The proposed Et–σv model performed well and led to excellent predictions for load levels of 40, 50, and 70 kN. Comparison with predictions using the Uzan model suggests that constitutive models of granular materials are best expressed in terms of vertical stress rather than mean stress for the prediction of elastic pavement response for field conditions.Key words: granular material, resilient modulus, triaxial test, plate-loading test, finite element.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207