MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981207718 · doi:10.1080/19386362.2019.1677410

Critical depth of displacement piles in overconsolidated cohesionless soils

2019· article· en· W2981207718 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geotechnical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringPileDisplacement (psychology)GeologySoil waterFailure mechanismEngineeringStructural engineeringSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite ample research reported on the shaft resistance of closed-end displacement piles, the mechanism of the shaft resistance in cohesionless soils is not fully understood. In the literature, the available theories produce a wide range of discrepancies in predicting the shaft resistance of these piles. This is due to the complexity of incorporating the stress history and recognizing the critical depth. The role of the overconsolidation and the critical depth concept has been the subject of debate for some time. Arguments were made for both sides, nevertheless, no definite conclusion has yet been drawn.This paper presents experimental investigations on the capacity of closed-end displacement piles in overconsolidated cohesionless soils. The set-up was capable of measuring the overconsolidation ratio of the sand, and the shaft resistance of the pile shaft.It is of interest to know that the critical depth was observed only when mean shaft resistance was analyzed.

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 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.232 · 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