The Saint-Jude landslide of 10 May 2010, Quebec, Canada: Investigation and characterization of the landslide and its failure mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A landslide occurred on 10 May 2010, along the Salvail River, in the municipality of Saint-Jude, Quebec. Debris of the landslide was formed of clay having horst and graben shapes, typical of spreads in sensitive clays. A detailed investigation was carried out by the Ministère des Transports, de la Mobilité durable et de l’électrification des transports du Québec, in collaboration with Université Laval, with the objective of characterizing this landslide, determining the causes, and learning about its failure mechanism. The soil involved was a firm, grey, sensitive, lightly overconsolidated clay with some silt. Data from piezometers installed near the landslide indicated artesian conditions underneath the Salvail River. Cone penetration tests allowed the location of two failure surface levels: the first one starting 2.5 m below the initial river bed, extending horizontally up to 125 m, and a second one 10 m higher, reaching the backscarp. Investigation of the debris with onsite measurements, light detector and ranging surveys, cone penetration tests, and boreholes allowed a detailed geotechnical and morphological analysis of the debris and reconstitution of the dislocation mechanism of this complex spread.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".