Upper-bound limit analysis of soils with a nonlinear failure criterion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limit analysis is a widely used technique for the analysis of geotechnical collapse states and there exists a significant body of literature covering its application to soils with a linear failure criterion. However, such a failure criterion is often an idealization of an actual nonlinear response for which available analytical techniques are limited. This paper presents a new fully general solution procedure for generating multi-wedge rigid-block upper-bound mechanisms for a soil with a nonlinear failure criterion, utilizing a curved interface that obeys the nonlinear yield function flow rule along its full length. This work extends the long-established kinematic sliding-wedge approach for linear soils and is illustrated through application to active and passive retaining wall and anchor–trapdoor problems. Through additional consideration of the lower-bound solution, close bounds on the retaining wall problem to within ∼1% are established. The ability of the nonlinear upper bound solution to predict the shear and normal stress at every point along the failure surface is discussed.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it