MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100721373 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0055

Bearing capacity of eccentrically loaded strip footings close to geotextile-reinforced sand slope

2014· article· en· W2100721373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emel Türker, Erol Şadoğlu, Evrim Cüre, Bayram Ali Uzuner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotextileEccentricity (behavior)Geotechnical engineeringBearing capacityStructural engineeringFailure mechanismDisplacement (psychology)GeologyUltimate failureEngineeringMaterials scienceUltimate tensile strengthComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of bearing capacity tests were conducted with an eccentrically (e/B = 0, 1/12, 1/6, 1/3) loaded model surface (Df/B = 0) and shallow (Df/B = 0.25) strip footings (B = 80 mm) resting close to reinforced finite sand slopes to investigate ultimate loads, failure surfaces, load–displacement curves, rotation of footing, etc. The experimental set-up used to run the tests consists of a tank, model footing, sand, and a loading mechanism. A single woven geotextile strip sheet was placed horizontally below the footing’s base at a depth of half of the footing’s width. Ultimate loads decreased with increasing eccentricity. This decrease is due to a combination of eccentricity and slope. The use of geotextile reinforcement increased ultimate loads in comparison with unreinforced cases. Failure surfaces were not symmetrical, primary failure surfaces developed on the eccentricity (slope) side, and secondary failure surfaces developed on the other side. Lengths of failure surfaces decreased with increasing eccentricity. Prior to failure, footings always rotated towards the eccentricity (slope) side a few degrees.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207