Target geotechnical reliability for redundant foundation systems
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
Geotechnical support systems (e.g., deep and shallow foundations) generally involve at least some redundancy. For example, if a building is supported by n p separate foundations, then failure (e.g., excessive settlement) of a single foundation will generally not result in failure of the building if the building is able to shed the load from the failed foundation to adjacent foundations. This load-shedding ability lends the foundation system redundancy — system failure only occurs if multiple foundations fail. This paper investigates the relationship between the level of geotechnical redundancy, individual foundation reliability, and system reliability for deep foundations (piles). In the particular case where the pile resistance remains constant after achieving its ultimate capacity (at a certain displacement), the relationship between individual and system reliabilities is computed theoretically. The more general case, where the load carried by the pile reduces after exceeding its ultimate capacity, is investigated by Monte Carlo simulation. Charts relating system and individual reliability indices are presented, which can be used to aid in the design of individual piles as part of a pile support system.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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