Research study of the hydraulic behaviour of the Po River embankments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the hydraulic behaviour of the fine-grained embankments along the mid-course of the Po River, research was carried out on a full-scale physical model, built on the floodplain along the existing embankment and forming a pond. The pond was filled to reproduce historical floods. The prototype was built according to recommendations formulated by the Po River Management Authority. The engineering properties of the foundation soils were investigated by in situ tests and complemented by some suction-controlled laboratory tests. Pore-water pressure was measured in the embankment and in its foundation before, during, and after the experimental reproduction of two floods that occurred in 1976 and 2000. Atmospheric variables were monitored at the prototype site. Monitoring data refer to 6 months of experimental activities. Pore-water pressure measurements were first presented and subsequently interpreted through an isothermal two-dimensional flow approach where boundary flow rates express the evolution of atmospheric variables. The distribution of the pore water provided by this interpretation was used for stability analyses of the prototype. Results from the experimental activities and their interpretation indicate that the river embankment remains extensively unsaturated during floods. Typical suction trends within the embankment, suction-associated soil strength, and the resulting slope stability safety factors are also shown.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".