MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902141467 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2018-0286

Determination of efficient sampling locations in geotechnical site characterization using information entropy and Bayesian compressive sampling

2018· article· en· W2902141467 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tengyuan Zhao, Yu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCity University of Hong Kong
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)Geotechnical engineeringCharacterization (materials science)Entropy (arrow of time)Penetration testCone penetration testGeotechnical investigationEngineeringComputer scienceMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Site characterization is indispensable in geotechnical engineering practice, and measurements on soil properties are performed through in situ tests, laboratory tests or other methods. However, due to time or budget limit, technical or access constraints, etc., the measurements are usually taken at a limited number of locations. This leads to a question of how to select the efficient locations for measurements or sampling such that as much information as possible on the spatial variability of soil properties can be obtained from a given number of measurements. In addition, geotechnical site characterization is a multi-stage process, and additional measurements might be required at a later stage of site characterization. In such a case, how the additional sampling locations can be selected efficiently such that the pre-existing measurements obtained from the preliminary stages of site characterization can be best used and how can as much information as possible on soil properties be further obtained are problems engineers face. This paper aims to address these two problems using information entropy and Bayesian compressive sampling. Real cone penetration test data along both vertical and horizontal directions are used to illustrate and validate the proposed methods. Results show that the proposed methods are very effective and robust in selecting efficient sampling locations for geotechnical site characterization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations63
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207