MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792760455 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2017-0492

Lateral resistance of pipes and strip anchors buried in dense sand

2018· article· en· W2792760455 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kshama Roy, Bipul Hawlader, Shawn Kenny, Ian D. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityQueen's UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch and Development Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsEmbedmentGeotechnical engineeringGeologySofteningShear (geology)Materials scienceComposite materialPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The response of buried pipes and vertical strip anchors in dense sand under lateral loading is compared based on finite-element (FE) modeling. Incorporating strain-softening behaviour of dense sand, the progressive development of shear bands and the mobilization of friction and dilation angles along the shear bands are examined, which can explain the variation of peak and post-peak resistances for anchors and pipes. The normalized peak resistance increases with embedment ratio and remains almost constant at large burial depths. When the height of an anchor is equal to the diameter of the pipe, the anchor gives approximately 10% higher peak resistance than that of the pipe. The transition from the shallow to deep failure mechanisms occurs at a larger embedment ratio for anchors than pipes. A simplified method is proposed to estimate the lateral resistance at the peak and also after softening at large displacements.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207