MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115850052 · doi:10.1139/t09-074

Reducing shear strength uncertainties in clays by multivariate correlations

2010· article· en· W2115850052 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jianye Ching, Kok‐Kwang Phoon, Ying‐Chu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsUnivariateShear strength (soil)Geotechnical engineeringShear (geology)Consistency (knowledge bases)Reliability (semiconductor)Triaxial shear testMathematicsComputer scienceEngineeringGeologyStatisticsSoil waterSoil sciencePhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantifications of uncertainties in soil shear strengths, including undrained shear strength of clay, are essential for geotechnical reliability-based design. In particular, how to reduce the uncertainties in undrained shear strengths based on all available information by correlation is a practical research subject, given the considerable cost of a typical site investigation. Although it is simple to reduce the uncertainties by correlation when the information is one dimensional (or univariate), it is quite challenging to reduce the uncertainties by using multivariate information through multiple correlations. This study proposes a systematic way of achieving multivariate correlations on undrained shear strengths. A set of simplified equations are obtained through Bayesian analysis for the purpose of reducing uncertainties: the inputs to the equations are the results of in situ or laboratory tests and the outputs are the updated mean values and coefficients of variation (c.o.v.s) of the undrained shear strengths. Two case studies are used to demonstrate the consistency of the proposed simplified equations. Results show that uncertainties in undrained shear strengths can be effectively reduced by incorporating multivariate information. Given that reliability-based design can justify more economical design with reduced uncertainties, the proposed equations essentially link the value of more and better tests directly to final design savings.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
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 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

Citations111
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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