MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pile-Driving Mechanics at the Base as Informed by Direct Measurements

2017· article· en· W2705134316 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin C. Kuei, Mason Ghafghazi, Jason T. DeJong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileDynamic load testingBase (topology)Penetration testGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringResidualPenetration (warfare)Bearing capacityConsistency (knowledge bases)Standard penetration testComputer scienceMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determination of the base contribution to total pile capacity is an important aspect in the design of end-bearing piles. For driven piles, dynamic load testing and signal matching are the predominant approach for estimating total pile capacity. This includes separating the base and shaft resistance, and differentiating between static and dynamic contributions. Despite its widespread usage, the approach is susceptible to uncertainty and nonuniqueness of solutions. The new instrumented Becker Penetration Test (iBPT) configured as a reusable test pile (RTP) is capable of directly measuring the dynamic pile response at the base and along the shaft during driving. In this paper, RTP measurements at the base are presented and used to guide the selection of models and parameters available in signal-matching methods. The direct measurements at the base depict pile driving as a steady penetration process with unload–reload cycles, and consistency of locked-in residual force between subsequent blows. The results show that when fundamental mechanical constraints are satisfied, simple existing models are adequate for capturing the measured response, and uncertainty and nonuniqueness at the base are curbed.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207