MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112246454 · doi:10.1139/t09-028

Soil–pipeline interaction along unstable slopes: a coupled three-dimensional approach. Part 1: Theoretical formulation

2009· article· en· W2112246454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giuseppe Cocchetti, Claudio di Prisco, Andrea Galli, Roberto Nova

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportServiceability (structure)Geotechnical engineeringNonlinear systemPipeline (software)PiecewiseStructural engineeringSoil structure interactionEngineeringDisplacement (psychology)GeologyFinite element methodMathematicsMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipelines buried along potentially unstable slopes are often monitored because soil movements can induce an evolution of the state of stress within the pipe that can eventually result in the loss of the serviceability of the system or even in its failure. In the present paper, the pipeline is discretised by means of a series of three-dimensional beam finite elements and the soil–pipeline interaction is reproduced by means of macroelements independent from each other, but characterized by a failure condition in which coupling among the different loading components is taken into account. The soil–pipeline interaction problem is formulated by accounting for the geometry of the slope, the soil and pipe mechanical properties, and the imposed soil displacement profile. A convenient piecewise linear formulation for the macroelement constitutive relationship is adopted and a large displacements scheme is also formulated.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations64
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207