Instability of loose dry granular slopes observed in centrifuge tilting table tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landslides in loose saturated granular materials can experience significant deviatoric strain softening leading to static liquefaction and flow failure. This research study aimed at understanding the instability conditions leading to softening has been conducted under triaxial or plane strain conditions on loose granular soils brought to failure under undrained or drained stress paths. In this paper, it is hypothesised that the onset of granular instability should also be reproducible in tilt-table tests of loose dry granular soils. A centrifuge tilt-table apparatus was developed to test this hypothesis in which the stress path imposed on the soil layer could be inferred from an infinite slope analysis and the shear and volumetric strain be measured through the transparent side walls. Experiments performed at 1g, 20g, 40g and 60g illustrate that this approach can capture the constitutive behaviour of the soil layer. Critically, as the tilt-table test is a load-control test, instability was observed as a rapid acceleration in shear strain rate accompanied by a rapid volumetric collapse of the pore space. The tilt-table test therefore not only enables a measurement of the angle of repose, but provides a method to characterise the instability behaviour of granular materials at low stress levels found in shallow landslides.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".