Travel distance angle for "rapid" landslides in constructed and natural soil slopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Rapid" landslides in constructed and natural soil slopes have the potential to cause loss of life, destruction of property, and damage to the natural environment because the velocity of the slide mass is such that persons in the travel path do not have time to evacuate and the kinetic energy is such that even small landslides can severely damage buildings and other structures. This paper presents methods for prediction of the post-failure travel distance for "rapid" landslides from constructed cut and fill slopes and natural soil slopes derived from a database of some 350 "rapid" landslides in predominantly soil slopes. The characteristics of soils, both dilative and contractive on initial shearing, and the slope conditions for which landslides are susceptible to development into slides of "rapid" post-failure velocity are discussed. Methods for estimating the travel distance angle of the post-failure travel of the slide mass have been developed and are based on consideration of the failure mechanics of the initial slide (whether contractive or dilative on initial shearing), the type of slope, the slide volume, the geometry of the slope at and below the slide source area, and the degree of confinement of the travel path of the landslide.Key words: "rapid" landslide, flow slide, debris flow, debris slide, travel distance angle, failure mechanism.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".