MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169504700 · doi:10.1680/geot.2002.52.9.639

Sidere: numerical prediction of large-strain consolidation

2002· article· en· W2169504700 on OpenAlexaff
G. Bartholomeeusen, G. C. Sills, Dobroslav Znidarčić, W. van Kesteren, Lucas Merckelbach, Robert Pyke, W. D. Carrier, Hsien‐Tsung Lin, Dayakar Penumadu, Han Winterwerp, S. Masala, Dave Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueGéotechnique · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsolidation (business)CompressibilityGeotechnical engineeringSettlingGeologyPore water pressureCalibrationMathematicsEnvironmental scienceEngineeringStatisticsEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-strain consolidation theory is widely used for the management of dredged disposal sites. The theory is universally accepted to deal with this problem, though the determination of the material properties is not yet standardised. Decisions made on this level can lead to the prediction of a totally different consolidation history. This paper describes the results of a prediction exercise, performed using a batch of sediment from the river Schelde (Antwerpen, Belgium). Numerical modellers were given the data of four calibration experiments and were then asked to predict another experiment. Settling column experiments (0·2–0·6 m in height) with density and pore pressure measurements provided the basis for the calibration data. The prediction demonstrated the significance of the soil compressibility at low effective stresses, when time-dependent behaviour is observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations71
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéotechniqueSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207