Load sharing ratio of pile-raft system in loose sand: an experimental investigation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This technical note presents the results of a series of tests carried out on instrumented model pile-raft foundation to investigate the load sharing ratios between the foundation’s components where a loose sand layer is encountered near the ground surface. Four different pile-raft models with two different pile numbers and lengths were considered. In each model, the settlement of the raft and the load of each pile were monitored during the load application process. The experiments showed the effectiveness of pile length on reducing the overall settlement of the pile-raft system. The results showed also that the proportion of load transferred to any pile in a closely spaced pile group increases with its distance from the centre of the group. Unlike some previous studies that classified soil profiles containing loose sands near the surface as unfavourable situations for piled rafts, the experimental results herein represent an evidence of the efficiency of piled rafts even in soil profiles with loose sands immediately beneath the raft. Indeed, ignoring the contribution of the raft would lead to unnecessary over-conservatism in the design of piled rafts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it