Comparing Shear Response of Dense Sands from Centrifuge and Direct Simple Shear Tests with Published Correlations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mode of shear in the field induced by a seismic wave is commonly assumed to be best captured by the cyclic direct simple shear (DSS) test. To investigate this assumption, this work uses an inverse analysis technique to estimate shear stress (τ)-shear strain (γ) from dynamic centrifuge tests on very dense Ottawa 40/70 sand (relative density, Dr ~ 95%). This back-calculated stress-strain response is compared to τ-γ response: (1) measured in drained and undrained monotonic and cyclic DSS tests on dry and saturated medium dense to very dense (Dr ~ 51 to 95%) sands; and (2) inferred from existing shear modulus reduction correlations available in the literature. The results indicate that the DSS response is softer to shear strains up to about 0.4%, while existing correlations based on resonant column-torsional shear tests capture the back-calculated τ-γ response from the centrifuge tests.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".