Evaluation of Soil–Pipe Interaction under Relative Axial Ground Movement
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
The expansion of urban communities around the world resulted in the installation of utility pipes near existing natural or artificial slopes. These pipes can experience significant increase in axial earth pressure as a result of possible slope movement in the pipeline direction. This research aims at utilizing the discrete-element method to investigate the response of a buried pipeline in granular material subjected to axial soil movement. To determine the input parameters needed for the discrete-element analysis, calibration is performed using triaxial and direct shear test data and the microscopic parameters are determined by matching the numerical and experimental results. The soil–pipe system is then modeled and the detailed behavior of the pipe and the surrounding soil as well as their interaction at the particle-scale level are presented. Conclusions are made regarding the suitability of the empirical approach used in practice to estimate the axial soil resistance in different soil conditions. This study suggests that caution should be exercised in calculating axial soil resistance to relative pipe movement in dense sand material. A suitable lateral earth pressure coefficient should be determined in these cases as a function of the soil and pipe properties.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it