An oedometer test study on the preconsolidation stress of glaciomarine clays
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
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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