Evaluation of self-penetration potential of a bio-inspired site characterization probe by cavity expansion analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Site investigations at limited-access project sites often require mobilization of smaller rigs that may not have the reaction mass required to perform soundings to the desired depth. This study explores the feasibility of a new conceptual bio-inspired solution by adapting functional principles from organisms whose primary mode of locomotion is soil burrowing, including razor clams, caecilians, and earthworms. These organisms radially expand a segment of their body to increase the normal radial pressure acting on it to temporarily form an anchor. This study evaluates the dimensions required for self-penetration of an idealized bio-inspired probe consisting of a radially expanding shaft and a penetrating tip. Cavity expansion analyses, field test data, and theoretical relationships from the literature are used to evaluate the self-penetration potential in different soil types. The results indicate that the resistance to self-penetration is higher in dense sands than in silts and clays. In sands, the resistance to self-penetration is greater for sands that exhibit a more dilative behavior at a given overburden pressure. On the contrary, the resistance to self-penetration in clays decreases slightly as the overconsolidation ratio is increased. The relative dimensions required to initiate self-penetration predicted by cavity expansion analysis are compared with the dimensions of various burrowing organisms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".