Constitutive approach for rate‐sensitive anisotropic structured clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper describes a constitutive approach to model the behavior of rate‐dependent anisotropic structured clay. Rate‐sensitivity is modeled using overstress viscoplasticity. Clay structure is treated as a viscous phenomenon whereby the viscosity of the undisturbed structured clay is initially very high and the viscosity degrades or decreases with plastic straining until the intrinsic or residual viscosity is reached. A microstructure tensor approach is used to make the structured viscosity anisotropic; whereas, the intrinsic viscosity is assumed to be isotropic. The behavior of the constitutive model is compared with the measured response of two clays (Gloucester and St. Vallier clay) from Eastern Canada during triaxial compression tests on specimens trimmed at different orientations to the vertical. The comparisons show that the constitutive framework is able to describe the anisotropic and rate‐sensitive response of both clays. The response of the model is also examined for the more general case of anisotropic consolidated triaxial compression and extension. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".