MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186453093 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2015-0050

A novel displacement-based rigorous limit equilibrium method for three-dimensional landslide stability analysis

2015· article· en· W2186453093 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hao Cheng, Xiaoping Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideGeotechnical engineeringDiscretizationNonlinear systemDisplacement (psychology)Slope stabilityGeologyFactor of safetyShear (geology)Strength reductionSafety factorSlope stability analysisDirect shear testMechanicsStructural engineeringMathematicsEngineeringMathematical analysisFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional stability analysis of landslides is investigated using the factor of safety of the entire sliding body, which provides no information concerning displacements of the analyzed landslides. In this paper, a novel displacement-based rigorous limit equilibrium method is proposed to investigate the displacements and stabilities of three-dimensional landslides. The relationship between the shear stresses acting on the base of the columns and the shear displacements is established based on the hyperbolic soil model, which can be directly obtained from direct shear tests. According to the displacement compatibility among the columns, the shear displacements of all columns can be determined by the vertical and horizontal displacements at a key point. Combining the six equilibrium conditions of the discretized columns with the nonlinear constitutive relation between stress and displacement of soils, the vertical displacement at the key point can be determined. By introducing the strength reduction technique into the displacement-based rigorous limit equilibrium method, the relationship between the reduction factor and the vertical displacement can be obtained. The displacement and the safety factor of three-dimensional landslides can be defined. Moreover, two cases are given to verify the robustness and precision of the present method in detail.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207