Geotechnical parameters of reclaimed sandfill from the cone penetration test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sandfill at reclaimed sites is usually formed by more than one placement method. Reclaimed sandfill is often highly variable, and the cone penetration test is most commonly used for site characterization. Correlations among the cone resistance and geotechnical parameters for sand are influenced by the in situ stress level, and it is important to incorporate the stress-level effect. In this study, cone penetration tests were performed at several levels from the top of a 10 m high surcharge, which was later removed step by step, and in situ density was determined layer by layer at the Changi East reclamation site in Singapore. Different ways of normalizing the cone resistance by the corresponding in situ stress were investigated. Specialized in situ tests including the self-boring pressuremeter test, the cone pressure meter test, the seismic cone penetration test, and the plate load test were conducted to provide the reference deformation characteristics of sandfill. Results of the in situ tests indicate that the sand density and the cone resistance profiles vary between areas formed by different sand placement methods. Site-specific correlations developed based on comparison of normalized cone resistance with the reference data obtained from laboratory tests and other in situ tests are found to be suitable for the evaluation of relevant soil parameters.Key words: stress normalization, cone resistance, correlations, geotechnical parameter, in situ characterization, granular soil.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".