MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901207914 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2018-0322

Experimental observation on laterally loaded pile in unsaturated silty soil

2018· article· en· W2901207914 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leonardo Maria Lalicata, A. Desideri, Francesca Casini, Luc Thorel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileCentrifugeGeotechnical engineeringBending momentSaturation (graph theory)Degree of saturationSoil waterGeologyVoid ratioWater tableMaterials scienceSoil scienceGroundwaterStructural engineeringMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experimental study was carried out to investigate the effects of soil partial saturation on the behaviour of laterally loaded piles. The proposed study was conducted by means of centrifuge tests at 100g, where a single vertical pile was subjected to a combination of static horizontal load and bending moment. The study was conducted on a silty soil characterized with laboratory testing under saturated and unsaturated conditions. During flight, two different positions of water table were explored. The influence of density was investigated by compacting the sample with two different void ratios. Finally, the effects of a variation of saturation degree on the pile response under loading were studied by raising the water table to the ground surface. Data interpretation allows drawing different considerations on the effects of partial saturation on the behaviour of laterally loaded piles. As expected, compared to saturated soils, partial saturation always leads to a stiffer and resistant response of the system. However, the depth of the maximum bending moment is related to the position of the water table and the bounding effects induced by partial saturation appear to be more important for loose soils.

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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207