Temporary stability of steep, noncemented and lightly cemented soil slopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many steep soil slopes are apparently stable beyond what is indicated by slope stability analysis. The mechanism of slope stability in dilating soils is explained in detail, and the development of shear strength in such soils is demonstrated by drained and undrained tests on dense sand. It is argued that appropriate shear strength parameters for analysis of slope stability in dilating materials describe the residual strength. It is explained how reliance on peak shear strength parameters is unsafe, because the component of shear strength created by the additional effective confining pressure caused by development of suction due to inhibited dilation can be exhausted by either access to water or by drying the soil. The fleeting phenomenon of apparent additional shear strength causes super-stability of the slope. Exhaustion of the soil’s capacity to dilate results in reduction of shear strength and instability of the steep slope. It is difficult to predict the time when the soil’s capacity to dilate is exhausted and when the consequent decline in shear strength occurs. This is because this decline occurs with access to water. This is demonstrated by triaxial compression tests on saturated and partly saturated, dilating specimens.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".