Pseudo-static lateral earth pressures on broken-back retaining walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Displacement of retaining walls during earthquakes causes damage to the structures founded on their backfill. The displacement of the wall can be reduced by decreasing the lateral earth pressure applied on its back. This can be achieved in a broken-back wall as the size of the failure wedge formed behind the wall is reduced; therefore, the calculation of lateral earth pressures is essential in assessing the safety of and designing broken-back retaining walls. In this study, a series of reduced-scale shaking table model experiments were performed on broken-back quay walls composed of concrete blocks with two different rear-face shapes. In comparison with a vertical-back wall, earth pressures increased at the upper forward (i.e., seaward) leaning rear-face segments of the wall, whereas they decreased at lower backward (i.e., landward) leaning elevations. Because of the wide application of the pseudo-static method of Mononobe–Okabe in engineering practice and design codes, lateral earth pressures have also been estimated using this approach. The comparison between the measured lateral earth pressures and those calculated using the Mononobe–Okabe method shows fairly good agreement in predicting the overall distribution of lateral active earth pressure during and after the shaking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".