On settlement of stone column foundation by Priebe's method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several contributions have been suggested to estimate the assumed linear elastic settlement of foundations on columnar reinforced soils. A number of authors have considered the so-called Priebe's method, which has been extensively used worldwide, and they have made suggestions especially for soft clays reinforced by stone columns. This paper first offers a critical analysis of the semi-empirical Priebe method by pointing out some inconsistencies related to assumptions made and the theoretical derivation of the settlement formula. A discussion of the limitation of Priebe's method for settlement estimation of foundations on soft soil reinforced by stone columns, with respect to other methods is included. Second, a comparison has been undertaken between predictions by Priebe's method and other design methods for three stone column projects in which some in situ data were recorded. On the basis of the studied case histories, it is concluded that recourse to other available and simple methods of design is more suitable than the use of Priebe's method.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it