Wick Drains and Rock Fill Save the Day: A Case for Settlement and Stability Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Greengate Mall was initially developed by placing up to 15 m (50 ft.) of fill. Construction of Greengate Super Center at the same site required additional 15 m (50 ft.) of new fill. The subsurface investigation and analysis indicated possibility of excessive long-term settlement. Wick drains and rock fill were used to solve settlement and time constraint problems and at the same time cut down the overall construction costs. Old concrete was crushed and used as porous blanket over wick drains. Nearby borrow site provided hard sandstone as new fill and a source of pavement base. Rock blasting required monitoring of adjacent dam, bridges, and other buildings. Under new fill the old fill settled by several centimeters (inches) and work was completed on schedule. Thoughtful engineering and careful construction planning saved valuable time and money. The Greengate Super Center and the rock fill embankment have performed well for the last six years with no obvious signs of stress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".