MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123129862 · doi:10.1139/t07-048

Base load – displacement response of piles in sand

2007· article· en· W2123129862 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenneth Gavin, Barry Lehane

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileGeotechnical engineeringSettlement (finance)StiffnessLateral earth pressurePenetration testEngineeringDisplacement (psychology)Structural engineeringCone penetration testBase (topology)Full scaleLoad testingGeologySubgrade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the results of a series of laboratory and field model pile tests performed to study the factors controlling the base pressure – settlement reponse of piles in sand. One series of tests involved the installation and load testing of steel open- and closed-ended piles in loose sand contained in a large pile testing chamber. A second series involved tests on open- and closed-ended steel piles and a concrete bored pile at a dense sand test bed site. The experiments were designed to investigate the effects of pile type, sand consistency, and installation resistance on a pile’s base response during static loading. The tests revealed that both the base capacity and stiffness of piles in sand are controlled by the degree of prestress imposed on the soil below the pile tip. Simple expressions, which require the small strain stiffness and cone penetration test data as the input parameters, are developed to predict the base pressure – settlement response. The final part of the paper employs other field tests on full-scale displacement piles and bored piles to verify the validity of the proposed approach.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations66
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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