Parameter variability of undrained shear strength and strain using a database of reconstituted soil tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During construction, the mobilization of undrained shear strength must be limited to avoid soil failure. Soil strains must be controlled to avoid compromising structural serviceability. To assess foundation performance by strength mobilization, an understanding of soil strains at various levels of strength mobilization is required. In practice, ground investigation data are often limited, and assessment of the expected variation of stress–strain and undrained shear strength is improved with empirical correlations calibrated with a database. The new database RFG/TXCU-278 contains data of 278 consolidated–undrained triaxial tests on reconstituted fine-grained soil samples compiled from the literature. Analysis of the database to evaluate the variability of undrained strength ratio (c u /[Formula: see text]) and a reference shear strain with shear mode is undertaken in this paper. The new database provides evidence that shear strain (like undrained shear strength) is sensitive to the consolidation (isotropic or K 0 ) and shear mode (triaxial compression or extension) applied in the test. For the materials included in the database, the strength mobilization parameters obtained from a triaxial compression test can be used to predict the corresponding triaxial extension parameters to a reasonable accuracy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".