MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072724553 · doi:10.1061/40971(310)23

Three-Dimensional Analysis of the Lodalen Landslide

2008· article· en· W2072724553 on OpenAlexaff
Gilson de Farias Neves Gitirana, Marcos A. Santos, M. D. Fredlund

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoCongress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSoilVision Systems (Canada)
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsLandslideFactor of safetyFinite element methodComputationSafety factorSlope stability analysisStability (learning theory)Simple (philosophy)GeologySlope stabilityGeotechnical engineeringComputer scienceStructural engineeringAlgorithmEngineeringMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A convenient three-dimensional slope stability approach, presented in the accompanying paper, is applied to the analysis of the Lodalen landslide. Simple finite element stress and seepage analyses are employed to compute the three-dimensional factor of safety. The analysis shows that the three-dimensional factor of safety computed for the Lodalen landslide was 1.29 in average. The value obtained is 23% higher than that obtained using two-dimensional solutions. The hypotheses and procedures adopted in the analyses are discussed and the validity of rigorous three-dimensional computations is evaluated.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoCongress 2008Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207