Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seismic site response of sandy soils and seismic soil–structure interaction are investigated using an electrohydraulic earthquake simulator mounted on a centrifuge container at an 80g field. The results of testing uniform and layered loose to medium-dense sand models subjected to 13 simulated earthquakes on the centrifuge are presented. The variation of shear modulus and damping ratio with shear strain amplitude and confining pressure was evaluated and their effects on site response were assessed. The evaluated shear modulus and damping ratio agreed reasonably with laboratory tests and empirical relationships. Site response analysis using the measured shear wave velocity and estimated modulus reduction and damping ratio as input parameters produced good agreement with the measured site response. The effect of soil–structure interaction for structures situated on dry sand is also investigated. These tests have revealed many important insights with regard to the characteristics of seismic site response and seismic soil–structure behaviour. The tests showed that the seismic response of soil deposits, input motions, and overall behaviour of the structure are affected by soil stratification. The results showed that the seismic kinematic soil–structure interaction is not very significant for structures situated on loose sand.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".