The cavity expansion problem for the interpretation of cone penetration and pressuremeter tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a method of evaluation of the state of cohesionless soil from the results of cone penetration and pressuremeter tests. This method is based on the comparison of the solutions to the cylindrical and spherical cavity expansion problems obtained by the authors with experimental results available in the literature on cone penetration and pressuremeter tests in large calibration chambers. The solutions to the cavity expansion problems are obtained with the use of a constitutive equation of hypoplasticity calibrated for the same soils as in the experiments. The pressure-expansion curves from pressuremeter tests are compared with those calculated for the expansion of a cylindrical cavity. The relation between the cone resistance measured in cone penetration tests and the limit pressure calculated for a spherical or a cylindrical cavity is established through a shape factor. Soils with similar granulometric properties are found to exhibit a common shape factor as a function of the pressure-dependent relative density. Key words: cone penetration test, pressuremeter test, cavity expansion, hypoplasticity
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".