MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471082026 · doi:10.1680/jgeot.15.p.271

SANISAND-Z: zero elastic range sand plasticity model

2016· article· en· W2471082026 on OpenAlexafffund
Yannis F. Dafalias, Mahdi Taiebat

Bibliographic record

VenueGéotechnique · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsPlasticityStress spaceYield surfaceMechanicsPlane stressHardening (computing)Stress (linguistics)Stress pathConstitutive equationGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceGeometryStructural engineeringMathematicsGeologyPhysicsEngineeringFinite element methodComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory of zero purely elastic range in stress space within the framework of bounding surface plasticity is applied to sand constitutive modelling. The yield surface shrinks to zero and becomes identical to the stress point itself, and plastic loading occurs for any direction of the stress ratio rate on which the loading and plastic strain rate directions now depend, rendering the model incrementally non-linear. The simplicity of the conceptual structure of the model is particularly attractive as it consists of only one surface, the bounding/failure surface, and the stress point itself in the stress ratio π-plane. The image stress point on the bounding surface is defined analytically in terms of the direction of the rate of the stress ratio, with the latter being inside, on, or outside the surface, so that the model can address consistently hardening, softening and critical state response. An updating scheme of the initial value of stress ratio at unloading–reloading events is proposed in order to avoid the overshooting phenomenon. The model follows the basic premises of the SANISAND family of models that unify the description for any pressure and density within critical state theory. The simulating capabilities of the model are shown to be comparable with those of classical models with very small yield surfaces, and additional simulations of unorthodox loading paths such as rotational shear are successfully compared with experimental data.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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

Citations186
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéotechniqueSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207