Cyclic deformation of granular material subjected to moving-wheel loads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a new testing method to examine the mechanical behavior of railroad ballast subjected to repeated train passages on ballasted track. Two types of cyclic loading tests, namely a single-point loading test and a moving-wheel loading test, were performed with small-scale models of ballasted track. Next, a “multi-ring shear apparatus” was developed as a type of torsional simple shear apparatus, and the applicability of a newly proposed multi-ring shear test to an element test of railroad ballast subjected to moving-wheel loads was examined by comparing the results of multi-ring shear tests with those of small-scale model tests. As a result, it was recognized that cumulative strain obtained from multi-ring shear tests is almost equivalent to the one derived from small-scale model tests. Moreover, it was revealed that the difference between loading methods has a considerable influence on the cyclic plastic deformation of railroad ballast because settlement in a moving-wheel loading test was much larger than the one in a single-point loading test. These results lead to the conclusion that a multi-ring shear test has an excellent applicability to the estimation of deformation behavior of granular materials subjected to moving-wheel loads.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".