Influence of the relative density and K0 effects in the cyclic response of Ottawa F-65 sand - cyclic Torsional Hollow-Cylinder shear tests for LEAP-ASIA-2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Liquefaction Experiments and Analysis Project (LEAP) is a joint international project that pursues the verification, validation and uncertainty quantification of numerical liquefaction models. As part of this project, twenty-three Hollow Cylinder Cyclic Torsional Shear Tests were conducted in the installations of the Disaster Prevention Research Institute at Kyoto University, focusing on the influence of the relative density and the K0 effects in the cyclic response of Ottawa F-65 Sand. The results are intended to compose part of a reliable database in the development of current and future V&V processes of liquefaction models. The paper presents the characteristics of the model preparation, test development, and a brief discussion of (1) the influence of the relative density and the K0 effects, (2) the volumetric strain due to post-cyclic reconsolidation, and (3) the repeatability and consistency of the tests.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".