MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134569310 · doi:10.1139/t09-102

Soil–pipeline interaction along unstable slopes: a coupled three-dimensional approach. Part 2: Numerical analyses

2009· article· en· W2134569310 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giuseppe Cocchetti, Claudio di Prisco, Andrea Galli

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Pipeline transportInstabilityDisplacement (psychology)Finite element methodPiecewiseGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringNonlinear systemSoil structure interactionEngineeringGeologyMechanicsMathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The soil–pipe interaction constitutive model, based on the concept of the “macroelement” described in a companion paper, has been implemented according to a piecewise linear (PWL) formulation in a three-dimensional finite element code in which the pipe is discretised by means of beam elements. To draw an interpretative theoretical framework for the structural response of the system, some ideal problems in which the pipeline is assumed to be straight and the displacement profile simple are discussed. Both large and small displacement approaches are employed, and the problem of axial instability of pipelines is also analysed. Monitoring data from three real case studies have also been numerically simulated: the first two concern pipelines subject to transversal slow soil movements and the third one refers to a small diameter pipeline subject to failure due to axial instability.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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