Three-dimensional finite element modelling of a full-scale geosynthetic-reinforced, pile-supported embankment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of four sections of a full-scale embankment constructed on soft soil is examined using a fully coupled and fully three-dimensional finite element analysis. The four sections had similar embankment loadings but different improvement options (one unimproved, one with pile-support only, one with a single layer geotextile-reinforced platform and pile-support, and one with two layers of geogrid-reinforced platform and pile-support). Like the field data, the numerical results show that the inclusion of piles decreases the settlement at the subsoil surface to 52% of that for the unimproved section, and the addition of a single layer of geotextile reinforcement (J = 800 kN/m) further reduced settlement to only 31% of that of the unimproved section. The effects of geosynthetic reinforcement and multiple layers of reinforcement on the performance of the pile-supported embankment are discussed. The relative load transfer is calculated using eight existing methods and they are compared with the field measurements and numerical results.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".