Seismically induced settlement of ground experiencing undrained shaking and laterally constrained compression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method is proposed for estimating seismically induced settlement of saturated sands experiencing undrained shaking and laterally constrained compression. An empirical relationship is developed between the seismic coefficient of vertical compression, mvs, and standard penetration test blow count, N60, as a function of factor of safety against liquefaction, Fℓ, based on data interpreted from 18 sets of laboratory cyclic direct simple shear tests and 23 cases of field observations of seismic liquefaction. The proposed method is compared with seismic settlement observed at 78 sites subjected to 7.1–8.0 magnitude earthquakes, and with predictions by the previous well-known methods of settlement analysis for undrained shaking. For silty–clayey sands, the significant effect of the plasticity of fines on seismic settlement is illustrated. The use of pre- or post-earthquake penetration resistance for back-analyses of field seismic settlement observations is examined. A tentative correction factor is suggested for seismic settlement estimated based on the assumption of undrained shaking and laterally constrained compression for liquefied saturated sublayers at small distances from drainage boundaries or under buildings with small breadths, which may experience volumetric compression during ground shaking.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".