Viscoplastic constitutive approach for rate-sensitive structured clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper extends an existing elastic–viscoplastic (EVP) constitutive model using a state-dependent viscosity parameter to describe the engineering response of undisturbed structured clay. The term structure refers to the effects of fabric and weak cementation bonds between clay particles. The extended constitutive model is coupled with the Biot consolidation theory and is formulated to describe the intrinsic or unstructured response of clay using overstress viscoplasticity, an elliptical cap yield surface, Drucker–Prager failure envelope, and a hardening law from critical state theory. The clay structure is mathematically accounted for by assuming that the initial fluidity of structured clay at yield and failure is very low and that the fluidity increases with increasing plastic strain. This process is usually referred to as “destructuration.” The formulation is evaluated using Saint-Jean-Vianney (SJV) clay by comparing calculated and measured behaviour during consolidated isotropically undrained triaxial compression, triaxial creep, and constant rate-of-strain Ko′-consolidation tests. The comparisons indicate that the EVP constitutive model can describe most of the rate-sensitive behaviour of SJV clay during both drained and undrained laboratory tests involving either constant-volume shear or predominantly volumetric compression of the soil skeleton.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".