MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335316433 · doi:10.1061/40971(310)123

Underground Expansion of a 27-Year Old Cultural Centre Excavation and Foundation Reuse Concerns

2008· article· en· W2335316433 on OpenAlex
Vishnu Diyaljee

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoCongress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)PileBasementExcavationGeotechnical engineeringCivil engineeringEngineeringReuseUnavailabilityGeologyArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the geotechnical, structural and construction issues, with emphasis on the geotechnical issues, which had to be taken into consideration in the 2005 basement construction below a 930m2 one-storey Cultural Centre supported primarily by cast-in-place (bored) concrete piles. The Cultural Centre was constructed in 1978 with a partial basement and extensions undertaken beneath its footprint in 1984 and 1993. Due to the unavailability of the original geotechnical report a new geotechnical investigation was undertaken from which capacities were evaluated for the original piles, as well as for the piles influenced by the proposed basement construction. After much discussion, which included the use of helical piles to enhance the capacity of the existing piles, spread footings were constructed around a few critical piles. Basement construction has since been completed without any problems. This case study demonstrates some of the concerns in reusing existing foundations, when design and construction records are unavailable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.204 · 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