MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315839683 · doi:10.1061/9780784413272.194

Generalized Direct CPT Method for Evaluating Footing Deformation Response and Capacity on Sands, Silts, and Clays

2014· article· en· W2315839683 on OpenAlexaff
Paul W. Mayne, David J. Woeller

Bibliographic record

VenueGeo-Congress 2014 Technical Papers · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsConetec Investigations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringFoundation (evidence)Displacement (psychology)Deformation (meteorology)GeologySquare (algebra)GeneralizationStress (linguistics)Soil waterClay soilStructural engineeringMathematicsGeometryEngineeringMathematical analysisSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of applied foundation stress versus normalized displacement curves (q vs. s/B) is applied to footings on sands, silts, intact clays, and fissured clays. A square root plotting of the normalized displacements (s/B) permits a single parameter characterization for each specific soil type that in turn tracks with the net cone tip resistance. The generalization is based on a statistical review of data from large foundations (B > 0.5m) involving 67 full-scale load tests where, at all sites, CPT cone tip resistances are available. In fact, for fine-grained soils, the data are from electronic piezocone tests where the proper correction from qc to qt has been obtained to allow the best possible results. The methodology permits an evaluation of the load-displacement-capacity response of shallow square footings based on CPTs performed in the four types of ground conditions.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeo-Congress 2014 Technical PapersSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207