Effect of gas bubbles on pore pressure response in peat beneath a railway embankment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the pore pressure behaviour observed within peat beneath a newly constructed railway embankment. Piezometers installed at different depths beneath the structure showed episodic increases in pore pressure above hydrostatic pressure followed by a rapid pore pressure decrease. It was postulated that this fluctuation in pore pressure was due to the movement and expulsion of gases within the peat. Investigations were conducted in the laboratory to replicate this pore pressure response. The peat specimens were subjected to isotropic consolidation, within a triaxial cell, at constant confining pressure while measuring the change in the specimen’s pore pressure and volume. The results of this investigation indicate that the gas bubbles move through the channeled network of voids towards the drainage boundary where they restrict the flow of water, which results in the increase of pore pressure towards an upper limit or escape pressure, ultimately causing an expulsion of gas bubbles. This expulsion of bubbles results in a rapid drop in pore pressure and volume change within the specimen. The implications of the volume change associated with this pore pressure behaviour are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".