Adjustment of spectral pseudo-static approach to account for soil plasticity and zone seismicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of the spectral pseudo-static procedure has been developed at the Université de Sherbrooke as an alternative to the conventional pseudo-static approach for the seismic stability analysis of clayey slopes. The destabilizing effect of an earthquake is approximated, in the new approach, by an inertial force that hyperbolically varies with depth while being proportional to the maximum acceleration of the seismic event. Its results have been rigorously verified against available static and dynamic laboratory tests, and have been extensively validated by a series of simulations performed using the computer code FLAC. Good agreements have been achieved between the results of the spectral pseudo-static procedure and complete numerical analyses, in terms of the computed safety factors and the critical slip surfaces. This implies that the spectral pseudo-static approach can be integrated into available limit equilibrium (LE) software providing a useful tool to examine the effect of dynamic soil characteristics on the proposed seismic coefficient profiles. The herein-reported study extends the previous endeavors to examine and quantify the effect of plasticity index (PI) (0%, 15%, 30%, 50%, and 100%) on the proposed formula of seismic coefficient profile using the same numerical modelling and assumptions. Original analyses were carried out considering earthquakes compatible with the seismicity of Quebec City (zone 4), and they have been repeated in the current study for earthquakes compatible with other regions having different seismicity (zones 2, 3, and 5). Based on the results of the current analyses, side-formulas were established between the spectral pseudo-static coefficient on ground surface for any value of soil plasticity index (PI) and the corresponding coefficient originally used in the main formula (PI = 30%).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".