A factored strength approach for the limit states design of geotechnical structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses the implications of an approach to the limit states design of geotechnical structures in which the soil strength parameters are factored, as is the one contained in the European construction code. It is shown that a factored strength approach has very different implications for the two customary types of geotechnical analyses; namely, the study of plastic mechanisms and interaction analyses. The relationship between partial safety factors and the reliability of a system is highlighted first, with the aid of approximate reliability calculations relative to two example problems. It is then demonstrated that the method of factoring the soil strength may be regarded as an effective way to assess the distance of a structure from the activation of a plastic mechanism, and to relate this distance to a conventional measure of its reliability. Using the same examples, it is argued that the procedure of factoring the soil strength parameters is not appropriate for the evaluation of the internal forces in structural elements: most of the soil–structure interaction analyses are nonlinear and, at least partly, empirically based. The insertion of unrealistic parameters, such as the factored strength properties, in a complex calculation may produce ambiguous and uncontrollable results.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".