MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157679039 · doi:10.1061/9780784479087.238

Strength and Stress Estimation in Soil Bentonite Slurry Trench Cutoff Walls Using Cone Penetration Test Data

2015· article· en· W2157679039 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Ruffing, JC Evans, Christopher R. Ryan

Bibliographic record

VenueIFCEE 2015 · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsKensington Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlurryGeotechnical engineeringCutoffCone penetration testBentoniteTrenchGeologyShear stressDirect shear testShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)Penetration (warfare)SettlingSoil waterMaterials scienceSoil scienceComposite materialEngineeringLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) is widely used for classifying soils and assigning soil properties to the subsurface because it is robust and can be used to quickly collect continuous data with depth. During and subsequent to the construction of a very deep soil-bentonite (SB) slurry trench cut-off wall in Mayfield NSW, Australia, the CPT was used to check the continuity and quality of the SB backfill material. The numerous CPT profiles conducted in the Mayfield wall provided a unique research opportunity for examining how shear strength and effective stress vary with depth. A method is proposed to estimate the undrained shear strength of the Mayfield Wall from the CPT combined with some vane shear data. The results support previous studies that show that the shear strength and the effective stress distributions in SB slurry trench cutoff walls are less than would be expected from a geostatic stress distribution. While there is some increase in shear strength with depth, these data show that the increase is modest and consistent with the less than geostatic stresses. In addition, the authors recommend a general procedure for shear strength and horizontal stress estimation using CPT data in any SB slurry trench application.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFCEE 2015Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207