MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607132566 · doi:10.11159/icgre17.106

Uplift Pressure Resistant Approach in Diaphragm Wall Excavation-case Study: Imam Hossein Holy Shrine Development -Karbala- Iraq

2017· article· en· W2607132566 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Behnam Eslami Ziraki, Vahid Ghasemi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavationDiaphragm (acoustics)Ancient historyGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringHistoryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today population increase leads to an increased demand for reliable infrastructure.One of the challenges in deep excavation project is high level water table and deformation control of adjacent sensitive structures.The diaphragm wall technique (DW) is one of the alternatives that proposed for this condition.Development of Imam Hossein Shrine project has been constructed in Karbala, Iraq.In this paper, the performance of a 40 meter deep multi-propped excavation in medium to very dense sand and clay layers is studied.The vertical sidewalls of the excavation were supported by cast-in-place fully reinforced concrete diaphragm walls.In this project, the level of underground water table is high, so hydrolic uplift pressure at bottom of excavation is a problem, which two approaches were proposed.Scenario I was utilized the short external diaphragm wall and tension pile and scenario II was using the deep external diaphragm wall.Based on our results the second method has the benefits such as less cost and construction time as method I. To evaluation the performance of these methods a finite difference numerical simulation was developed by FLAC2D code.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical and construction materials studiesFrench-language works237,207