MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800268174 · doi:10.1520/jte20170517

Nature-Inspired Bridge Scour Countermeasures: Streamlining and Biocementation

2018· article· en· W2800268174 on OpenAlex
Junliang Tao, Junhong Li, Xiangrong Wang, Ruotian Bao

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Applications in Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlumePierBridge scourBridge (graph theory)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringErosionCivil engineeringFlow (mathematics)Structural engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bridge scour has long been identified as the major cause of bridge failures. Bridge scour refers to the loss of sediment around bridge foundations, and it occurs when the erosive force from the flow exceeds the resistance from the soil. This article presents an experimental study on the effectiveness of two nature-inspired countermeasures for scour control and prevention, namely, streamlining and biocementation. On one hand, inspired by the streamlined form of the boxfish and the blue shark, this study introduced streamlining features (i.e., sloped nose and concaved sidewalls) for bridge piers in order to reduce the erosive forces in the vicinity of the piers. On the other hand, inspired by the natural process of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation (MICP) in soil, a polymer-modified MICP method is developed to “cement” the coarse-grained sand in order to increase the erosion resistance. Accordingly, two series of experimental tests were conducted to evaluate the performance of these two countermeasures: (1) based on the numerical results of a pier streamlining optimization study, four small-scale pier models with different streamlining levels were constructed using 3D printing techniques, and flume tests were conducted to characterize the scour process around these models; (2) Ottawa graded sand treated via the polymer-modified MCIP method was tested in the flume to investigate its effectiveness on bridge scour control. The experimental results revealed that both streamlining and biocementation could significantly reduce or even fully prevent the scour around the model bridge piers under the laboratory testing conditions.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.290 · 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