MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2442334060 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0037

Correlations for undrained shear strength of Finnish soft clays

2016· article· en· W2442334060 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marco D’Ignazio, Kok‐Kwang Phoon, Siew Ann Tan, Tim Länsivaara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImperial College London
KeywordsConsolidation (business)Geotechnical engineeringMultivariate statisticsAtterberg limitsGeologyDirect shear testNorwegianShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)StatisticsMathematicsSoil scienceSoil waterWater content

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study focuses on the derivation of transformation models for undrained shear strength (s u ) of Finnish soft sensitive clays. Specific correlation equations for s u of Finnish clays are presented in this work for the first time. Field and laboratory measurements from 24 test sites in Finland are exploited for this purpose and a multivariate database is constructed. The multivariate data consist of s u from the field vane test, preconsolidation stress, vertical effective stress, liquid limit, plastic limit, natural water content, and sensitivity. The main objective is to evaluate the interdependence of s u , consolidation stresses, and index parameters and provide a consistent framework for practical use. The new correlations are established through regression analyses. The constructed framework is further validated by another independent multivariate database of clays from Sweden and Norway as well as by empirical equations for Swedish and Norwegian clays. Existing correlations are evaluated for Finnish and Scandinavian clays. Finally, bias and uncertainties of the new correlations are presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations112
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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