DInSAR data assimilation for settlement prediction: case study of a railway embankment in the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Secondary settlements in soft soils represent a significant fraction of the total settlement induced by external loads. Consequently, these settlements can play a key role in performance, serviceability, and safety of engineering works such as buildings, roads, embankments, and pipelines. This paper addresses the development of a predictive settlement model for a railway embankment built on soft clayey–peaty soils by following an original procedure consisting of three cascading steps: (i) preliminary detection of the most settlement-affected portions of the infrastructure; (ii) development of an equivalent subsoil model to study secondary settlements; (iii) back-calculation of the parameters of a predictive settlement model (design subsoil model) via a variational data assimilation scheme that exploits ground displacement measurements derived from differential interferometric synthetic aperture radar (DInSAR) data. The main achievement relies on the retrieval of a stochastic prediction of secondary settlements that can contribute to rationalize both conventional monitoring campaigns and management of key infrastructure.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".