MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476289924 · doi:10.1201/b17017-49

Parallel processing of excavation in soils with randomly generated material properties

2014· book-chapter· en· W2476289924 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lee Margetts, Ian F. C. Smith, L Lever, D. V. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil waterExcavationGeologyMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, affordable high performance clusters enable engineers to carry out large nonlinear 3D analyses very quickly using parallel processing. It has been estimated that by 2018, a 1 Petaflop cluster (with 100,000 cores) will cost around $150,000; a price affordable by a reasonably sized engineering firm or University department. With these significant improvements in technology, it is becoming increasingly cost-effective to incorporate uncertainty into analyses, for example by undertaking Monte Carlo simulations with randomly generated soil properties. As each realisation is independent, it can be executed at the same time. For large models that require move memory than is available on a single core, each realisation can be solved by subdividing the problem over multiple cores. The authors will present results for an excavation problem using this two-level parallelisation strategy. The parallel software used, ParaFEM, has been recently updated to interface with a number of external tools including the RFEM library, the visualisation tool ParaView and the graph partitioner METIS. For a single realisation, ParaFEM can make good use of 32,000 cores and solve problems with 1 billion degrees of freedom.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207