MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113764185 · doi:10.1139/t2012-019

<i>p</i>–<i>y</i> curve and lateral response of piles in fully liquefied sands

2012· article· en· W2113764185 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Ashour, Hamed Ardalan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPore water pressureGeotechnical engineeringLiquefactionPileSoil liquefactionSoil waterGeologyOverburden pressureOverburdenEffective stressLateral earth pressureDeflection (physics)Soil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a technique to assess the response of laterally loaded piles and associated p–y curves in fully liquefied soils (where p is the soil–pile reaction and y is the pile deflection). The technique accounts for the variation of water pressure in the liquefied soils around the pile and its impact on the shape of the p–y curves and the pile lateral response. A constitutive undrained stress–strain model for fully liquefied saturated sands using the basic properties of sand is established to predict the post-liquefaction varying resistance of liquefied sands at different levels of loading assuming fully undrained conditions. The degradation in soil strength due to the free-field excess pore-water pressure (u xs,ff ), caused by an earthquake and resulting in full liquefaction, is considered along with the near-field excess pore-water pressure (u xs,nf ) induced by lateral loading from the superstructure. The presented procedure also accounts for the influence of the overburden pressure and sand density on the variation of excess water pressure in the near-field soil, the rebound of sand strength, and the shape of the p–y curve due to the dilative behavior of sands.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207