Measuring shear wave velocity, Vs, of a hidden layer: an application to soil improvement under roads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a number of practical cases, a typical one being the investigation of the subsoil properties below roads or foundations, one faces the problem of measuring the elastic properties of a geological layer (here called “hidden layer”) underlying a more compact and rigid surface layer. In such cases, the effectiveness of common surface seismic methods is poor for different reasons, but mostly linked to the reflection–transmission properties of the waves at a stiff-to-soft interface. Borehole methods are more efficient, but expensive and only provide vertical information at certain points. Attempts carried out in the past to characterize the hidden layer properties through surface seismic techniques consisted in placing the seismic source on the surface alongside, but off the stiff artificial layer (road or foundation). An alternative approach is presented based on placing the seismic source just below the stiff artificial layer. In cases where soil improvement–compaction are carried out through injection of expanding resins, then the hidden layer can be easily reached via the injecting tools and in some cases (e.g., urban settings characterized by laterally continuous artificial layers or roads constructed on embankments) this can be the only viable option. The results obtained from this approach using a number of practical cases where roads affected by differential sinking have later been compacted will be presented. The average soil improvement that can be achieved with the specific kind of expanding resin used in this study is then quantified.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".