MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134278855 · doi:10.1139/t09-065

Interpretation of cone penetration tests — a unified approach

2009· article· en· W2134278855 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural Resources
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCone penetration testGeotechnical engineeringPenetration testChartNormalization (sociology)MathematicsComputer scienceGeologyEngineeringStatisticsSubgrade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electric cone penetration test (CPT) has been in use for over 40 years and is growing in popularity in North America. This paper provides some recent updates on the interpretation of some key geotechnical parameters in an effort to develop a more unified approach. Extensive use is made of the normalized soil behaviour type (SBTn) chart based on normalized cone resistance (Q t ) and normalized friction ratio (F r ). Updates are provided regarding the normalization process and its application to the identification of soil type. The seismic CPT has provided extensive data linking CPT net cone resistance to shear-wave velocity and soil modulus. New correlations are presented in the form of contours of key parameters on the SBTn chart. These new relationships enable a more unified interpretation of CPT results over a wide range of soils. Updates are also provided in terms of in situ state parameter, peak friction angle, and soil sensitivity. The correlations are evaluated using available laboratory and full-scale field test results. Many of the recommendations contained in this paper are focused on low to moderate risk projects where empirical interpretation tends to dominate. For projects where more advanced methods are more appropriate, the recommendations provided in this paper can be used as a screening to evaluate critical regions–zones where selective additional in situ testing and sampling maybe appropriate.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
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