MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098774987 · doi:10.1139/t11-059

Progressive failures in eastern Canadian and Scandinavian sensitive clays

2011· article· en· W2098774987 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ariane Locat, Serge Leroueil, Stig Bernander, Denis Demers, Hans Petter Jostad, Lyes Ouehb

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)Ministère des TransportsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère des Transports
KeywordsLandslideGeologyGeotechnical engineeringInstabilitySlope stabilityGrabenLateral earth pressureErosionGeomorphologySeismologyTectonicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observations from past events are used to show that the concept of progressive failure may explain translational progressive landslides and spreads — large landslides occurring in sensitive clays. During progressive failure, the strain-softening behaviour of the soil causes unstable forces to propagate a failure surface further in the slope. Translational progressive landslides generally take place in long, gently inclined slopes. Instability in a steeper upslope area is followed by redistribution of stress, which increases earth pressure further downslope. Passive failure may therefore occur in less-inclined ground, heaving the soil. Spreads are usually trigged by erosion of a deposit having a higher angle near the toe. Instability starts near the toe of the slope and propagates into the deposit, reducing earth pressure. This may lead to the formation of an active failure with dislocation of the deposit into horsts and grabens. The failure mechanism of both types of landslides is controlled by the stresses in the slope and the stress–strain behaviour of the soil. The mechanism presented explains the sensitivity of a slope to minor disturbances and the resulting high retrogressions observed for such landslides in Scandinavia and eastern Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations181
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207