An oedometer test study on the preconsolidation stress of glaciomarine clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress history is usually determined by interpreting the results of oedometer tests to obtain the preconsolidation stress using traditional methods such as those proposed by Casagrande and Janbu. Both these methods are based on the assumption that the soil experiences a change in stiffness, from a stiff response to a soft response, close to the preconsolidation stress. Disturbed soils, however, especially overconsolidated clays of low plasticity, exhibit a soft response at low stresses, thereby making the interpretation of oedometer tests using traditional methods extremely difficult. Using data mainly from the Haltenbanken area, offshore Norway, a study was undertaken to investigate the various methods and testing procedures available to determining stress history. Oedometer verification tests were also performed on reconstituted specimens to compare interpreted values with the actual applied preconsolidation stress. This paper describes the results of the study by illustrating the variation in the interpretation methods and testing procedures used to determine preconsolidation stress.Key words: preconsolidation stress, yield stress, overconsolidated, low plastic clays, oedometer test, stress history.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".