Bibliographic record
Abstract
Practising engineers designing civil engineering works on soft clay usually assume that laboratory tests on normal piston tube sampling will at worst give conservative design parameters. Indeed most research into sampling disturbance effects on soft clays has proven that use of poor-quality tube samplers ultimately leads to lower undrained strength, stiffness and preconsolidation stress than actually exist in situ. There is some evidence to suggest that this may not hold true for ‘intermediate’ clay/silts or laminated soils. These issues were investigated for the Athlone laminated clay/silt, and it was found that tube sampling disturbance leads to increase in stiffness and undrained strength, and induces a strong tendency for dilatant behaviour post peak. These findings were made by comparing tube sample data with data from high-quality Sherbrooke block sampling and full-scale field trials. From the results of this investigation, and from comparisons with other soils, it is concluded that undrained tube sampling strains have only a minor influence, and that the behaviour of these medium plasticity clay/silts is due mainly to partially drained tube insertion process. Engineers dealing with soft ‘intermediate’ or laminated soils need to assess the laboratory-derived parameters carefully, especially when the clay content is less than about 40% and the plasticity index is less than 20%.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".