The 1994 landslide at Sainte-Monique, Quebec: geotechnical investigation and application of progressive failure analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1994, a landslide occurred in the municipality of Sainte-Monique, Quebec. The debris of the landslide had graben and host shapes, typical of spreads in sensitive clays. The geotechnical investigation shows that the soil involved is a firm to stiff, sensitive, nearly normally consolidated grey silty clay of high plasticity. This soil exhibits a high sensitivity and a high brittleness during shear and is therefore susceptible to progressive failure. Traditional stability analysis cannot explain this landslide. This gives the opportunity to examine the applicability of progressive failure analysis to this spread. Using the finite elements method, it is demonstrated that the initiation and observed extent of the failure surface are explained by a soil having high brittleness during shear and a large-deformation shear strength close to the remoulded shear strength of the soil. The dislocation of the soil mass can also be explained by the active failure occurring in the soil mass above the failure surface during or shortly after failure propagation. It is therefore numerically demonstrated that progressive failure explains the initiation and the extent of the failure surface of this spread.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".