MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170318899 · doi:10.1061/41021(335)59

Load Transfer Behavior of Full-Scale Instrumented Screw Anchors

2009· article· en· W2170318899 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristen Tappenden, David C. Sego, P. K. Robertson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural ResourcesUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Hospital EdmontonAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsStrain gaugeGeotechnical engineeringContext (archaeology)GeologyShear stressShear (geology)Structural engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A research program was undertaken to study the load-transfer behavior of full-scale multi-helix screw anchors installed in natural soils. Four triple-helix screw anchors were instrumented with strain gauges at incremental distances along the inside of each anchor shaft. The test anchors were installed in glacio-lacustrine clay and aeolian sand deposits, and statically loaded in uplift and compression. Strain gauge readings collected during the load testing were used to delineate the stress transfer along the length of the test anchors to the surrounding soil. The resulting load distribution curves are compared to values predicted by the published "cylindrical shear" model, and discrepancies between the model and measured values are discussed. The results provide a context for the engineering design of screw anchors based on their interaction with the surrounding soil.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207