Investigation of behavior of footings over rigid inclusion-reinforced soft soil: experimental and numerical approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to investigate the behavior of a footing lying directly upon a rigid inclusion-reinforced soft soil. Both experimental and numerical approaches were conducted. The studied cases include single rigid inclusion tests, a footing over nonrigid inclusion-reinforced soil, and a footing over rigid inclusion-reinforced soil. The vertical loading tests on single rigid inclusions and the footing over unreinforced soil showed the behavior of the multi-layered soil, thus allowing for the determination of soil parameters for the numerical analyses. The tests on the footing over reinforced soil were, furthermore, carried out with different loading cases (centered and eccentric vertical loads and horizontal loads). Special attention was paid to the influence of the complex loading cases on the footing over a reinforced soil system by the measurement of the inclusion head pressure, the vertical and lateral footing settlements, and the lateral inclusion displacements. The measured pressure on the inclusion seemed to increase linearly with the vertical loading on the footing. A good agreement between the numerical analysis results and measurement data has been found for the loading phases while underprediction appears for a few loading cycles, probably due to the simplified soil constitutive model adopted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".