Experimental investigation of compaction-grouted soil nails
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An innovative compaction-grouted soil nail was designed by injecting grout into a special latex balloon (grouting bag) to avoid bleeding and penetration of grout into the surrounding soil. A series of large-scale model tests was performed to study the surrounding soil responses due to grouting and the subsequent pull-out resistance of the soil nail. The experimental results show that grouting pressure plays an important role in the enhancement of the density and (or) strength of the surrounding soil. In addition, during the pull-out process, the compaction-grouted soil nail exhibits a strain-hardening behaviour without a yield point. This is a significant advantage of this new soil nail, indicating that it can enable soil masses to remain stable against a relatively large deformation before ultimate failure. The main factors behind the improvement of the pull-out resistance of the new soil nail are, first, the compaction–densification of the soil near the grouting bag due to grouting, resulting in the enhancement of the shear strength of the soil, and, second, the enlargement of the grouting bag, causing the increase of the interface shear and end resistance to the pull-out of the soil nail.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".