New methods for system reliability analysis of soil slopes
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
A slope may have many possible slip surfaces. As sliding along any slip surface can cause slope failure, the system failure probability of a slope is different from the probability of failure along an individual slip surface. In this paper, we first suggest an efficient method for evaluating the system failure probability of a slope that considers a large number of possible slip surfaces. To obtain more insights into the system failure probability of a slope, we also propose a method to identify a few representative slip surfaces most important for system reliability analysis among a large number of potential slip surfaces and to calculate the system failure probability based on these representative slip surfaces. An equation for estimating the bounds of system failure probability based on the failure probability of the most critical slip surface is also suggested. The system failure probability is governed by only a few representative slip surfaces. For a homogenous slope, the failure probability of the most critical slip surface is a good approximation of the system failure probability. For a slope in layered soils, the system failure probability can be significantly larger than the failure probability of the most critical slip surface.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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