MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998447013 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2019-0341

Nonlinear solutions for laterally loaded piles

2019· article· en· W2998447013 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Bipin Kumar Gupta, Dipanjan Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPileNonlinear systemFinite element methodParametric statisticsGeotechnical engineeringDisplacement (psychology)ModulusDisplacement fieldVirtual workStructural engineeringConstitutive equationMathematicsDifferential equationMathematical analysisMechanicsGeologyEngineeringGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A nonlinear analysis framework for laterally loaded piles is presented that is as accurate as equivalent three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis, but computationally one order of magnitude faster. The nonlinear behavior of sands and clays are account for by using hyperbolic modulus–reduction relationships. These nonlinear–elastic constitutive models are used to calculate the reduced modulus at different points in the soil based on the soil strains induced by lateral pile displacement. The reduced modulus at different points in the soil domain are spatially integrated to calculate the reduced soil resistance parameters associated with the differential equation governing the lateral pile displacement. The differential equations governing the lateral displacements of pile and soil under equilibrium are obtained by applying the principle of virtual work to a continuum-based pile–soil system. These coupled differential equations are solved using the one-dimensional finite difference method following an iterative algorithm. The accuracy of the analysis is verified against equivalent three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis, and the validity of the analysis in predicting the field response is checked by comparisons with multiple pile load test results. Parametric studies are performed to gain insights into the lateral pile response.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207