MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2731762000 · doi:10.1061/9780784480809.012

Jet-Grouting as Earth Retention System in the Canadian Pacific Northwest: Case History of a Challenging 16 Meter Deep Excavation

2017· article· en· W2731762000 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paolo Gazzarrini, Matt Kokan, Stephen Jungaro, Dan Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueGrouting 2017 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsPetro Geotech (Canada)Geoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderpinningShoringExcavationTowerJet (fluid)EngineeringArchaeologyCivil engineeringGeologyGeotechnical engineeringHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jet-grouting is often used in British Columbia, Canada, as an earth retention system for excavation support and, contemporarily, as water cut-off. This paper mention briefly few case histories, with particular emphasis on the application of jet-grouting technology, as a soil improvement technique, for the excavation support and the underpinning of the Georgia Viaduct foundations, for the construction of a 32 story above grade tower with over five levels of below grade parking. Some iconic Vancouver Buildings, such as Olympic Village, built for the 2010 winter games, have been constructed with the use of jet-grouting, but, probably the most challenging is the Rogers Arena South Tower. The tower is located in False Creek, Vancouver, in proximity of Rogers Arena, home of the local NHL hockey team, the Vancouver Canucks, immediately North of Griffiths Way at Pacific Boulevard and South of the Georgia Street Viaduct. The presence of the existing viaduct results in extreme structural challenges that were overcome with the use of jet-grouting and micropiles. The paper will describe the jet-grouting soil improvement design and construction used for the underpinning of the viaduct piers and the temporary shoring, as well the instrumentation used for the monitoring of the viaduct piers and shoring.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designCase report
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrouting 2017Same topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207