Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coulomb's trial wedge method for estimating the active force on retaining walls is applied to situations where there are steep slopes at limiting equilibrium behind the walls. The analysis is applied initially to slopes of dry cohesionless material; in this case the slope angle is equal to the friction angle of the material. The analysis produces two interesting, and perhaps surprising, results. The first is that the critical wedge angle equals the slope angle, and the critical wedge becomes a "slab" extending an unlimited distance up the slope above the wall. The second is that as the inclination of the slope and friction angle (which are equal) increase the active force on the wall decreases. The method is then applied to more general slopes involving cohesion, friction, and seepage. Back-analysis is first used to obtain combinations of cohesion and friction corresponding to limiting equilibrium; these are then used in the wedge analysis. The results obtained are similar to those for the dry cohesionless slope. The method provides a means of estimating required retaining forces for cuts made in steep slopes of residual soil or partly weathered rock where estimation of strength parameters is often very difficult.Key words: slopes, steep, back-analysis, Coulomb, wedge, analysis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".