MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902793685 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2018-0512

Delayed response of excavations in structured clays

2018· article· en· W2902793685 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fabiano Bertoldo, Luigi Callisto

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringConsolidation (business)InstabilityPore water pressureExcavationDissipationGeologyEarthquake shaking tableMicrostructureMaterials scienceMechanicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the behaviour of an idealized excavation carried out in a clay sensitive to destructuration is studied through a series of finite element analyses, employing an advanced bounding surface model developed for structured clays. Several cases are examined to investigate the influence of factors including the velocity of destructuration, damage to the soil–wall contact produced by the wall construction, and width-to-height ratio of the excavation. The case of a soil deposit insensitive to microstructural damage is also studied for comparison. Results of the numerical analyses show that the progressive dissipation of excess pore-water pressures generated during the excavation stage can damage the clay microstructure severely enough to trigger an instability phenomenon. If the clay structure deteriorates rapidly, the instability is concurrent with the dissipation of excess pore-water pressures. However, for a clay less sensitive to microstructural damage, the instability can occur towards the end of the consolidation process, or even be preceded by a deceptively stable time interval, during which small redistributions of pore-water pressure can trigger an important destructuration and collapse of the excavation. In a final part of the paper, results of the numerical analyses are used to provide indications about the most appropriate quantities to monitor to provide an effective early warning of the instability phenomenon.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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