Bibliographic record
Abstract
The test fill at Onsøy, close to the town of Fredrikstad in Norway, was built on a very soft marine clay with in situ vane strength as low as 11 kPa and a plasticity index varying from 34 to 50. The dimensions at the bottom of the long fill were 20 m × 60 m and the height 2.3 m. The fill, as placed, had a computed factor of safety against foundation failure of 1.35 based on in situ vane strength. The fill was allowed to sit for about 3 years (from 1972 to 1975) before it, in a second stage, was brought to failure by raising the height. The main purpose of the first stage was to study the stress–strain–time relationships for the soft clay and compare the values of geotechnical parameters determined by careful laboratory tests with those back-calculated from the observed field behaviour. The test fill foundation was heavily instrumented to measure clay deformations and pore pressures with time. Field observations showed that the Onsøy test fill turned out to be more of a drained loading case than an undrained case in spite of the fairly rapid construction of the fill. Actually, subsequent undrained triaxial and direct simple shear tests strongly indicate that the fill might have failed if less drainage had taken place, i.e., if the drainage paths had been longer and (or) if the coefficient of consolidation had been lower.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".