MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110886633 · doi:10.1139/t03-004

A neural network framework for mechanical behavior of unsaturated soils

2003· article· en· W2110886633 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ghassem Habibagahi, Alireza Bamdad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkSoil waterPerceptronGeotechnical engineeringStress (linguistics)Computer scienceNetwork architectureStress–strain curveGeologyArtificial intelligenceDeformation (meteorology)Soil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a neural network approach is used to describe the mechanical behavior of unsaturated soils. A sequential architecture was chosen for the network, that is, a multilayer perceptron network with feedback capability. The input layer consisted of nine neurons, where six of them represented the initial soil conditions and the remaining three neurons were continuously updated for each increment of axial strain based on outputs from the previous increment. The output layer consisted of three neurons representing values of deviatoric stress, volumetric strain, and change in suction at the end of each increment. Next, a database was developed from triaxial test results available in the literature. The database was used to train and test the network. Neural network simulations were compared with experimental results. The comparison indicates the good performance of the proposed network for predicting the mechanical behavior of unsaturated soils. Moreover, the trained network was employed to simulate other stress paths not present in the database to model the so-called "collapse phenomena." The results were promising.Key words: unsaturated soil, neural network, stress–strain, collapse, modeling, constitutive law.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations75
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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