Uplift soil–pipe interaction in granular soil
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil–pipeline interaction for uplift in granular soil is evaluated by means of a two-dimensional, finite element (FE) continuum model with a Mohr–Coulomb (MC) yield surface for peak strength, a strain-softening relationship tied to critical void conditions, and an equivalent modulus that is consistent with soil deformation at maximum uplift resistance. The model accounts for soil migration beneath the pipe through FE mesh adjustment coordinated with upward pipe displacement. A systematic comparison of model results with multiple full-scale test measurements of pipe in dry sand show excellent agreement both with respect to maximum force and force–displacement relationships, including post-peak performance. The relationship between peak upward force and pipe depth is developed for various sand densities, all of which show maximum force at a depth-to-diameter ratio of 30. Hyperbolic and bilinear models for vertical upward force versus displacement are presented. The analytical approach described in this paper benefits from its adaptation to MC strength selection available in many commercial software packages.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it