MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A comparison of probabilistic distributions of undrained shear strength of soils in Nipigon River, Canada

2019· article· en· W2982662841 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nupur Kanwar, Jian Deng

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLog-normal distributionPrinciple of maximum entropyProbabilistic logicRandom variableGeotechnical engineeringProbability distributionProbability density functionMathematicsShear strength (soil)Entropy (arrow of time)Goodness of fitStatistical parameterSoil waterGeologyStatisticsSoil sciencePhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In probabilistic reliability analysis and design, critical geotechnical variables such as soil shear strength are usually regarded as random variables with a probability distribution rather than deterministic values or constants. In this paper, the vane shear test is briefly introduced and used to obtain undrained shear strength of soil in the area of Nipigon river landslide, Ontario, Canada. Then the maximum entropy method is presented to generate an unbiased probabilistic distribution for soil properties based on optimal-order moments from observed soil samples. A comparative study between maximum entropy distributions and traditional lognormal and normal distributions is conducted to evaluate the performance of fitted probabilistic distributions. Kolmogorov-Smirnov goodness of fit test shows that the maximum entropy distribution with four order moments fit the undrained shear strength best. The analytical entropy distribution obtained can be used in probabilistic reliability analysis.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental ScienceSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207