Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the recent advancement in technology, the method, accuracy and speed of slope stability analysis have been vastly improved. Nevertheless, the reliability and appropriateness of such analysis can be very much in doubt if the soil behaviour, in particular the shear strength behaviour, is not fully understood. The objective of this paper is therefore to evaluate the shear strength behaviour of various soil types in Hong Kong. This comprises the collection, processing and analysis of the laboratory and field works carried out in the past few decades, in particular the triaxial compression testing in the laboratory and standard penetration test (SPT) in the field. For correlating SPT with soil shear strength, a fairly large number of carefully controlled site investigation works with SPT are carried out both above and below any Mazier sampling. Laboratory triaxial tests are then carried out in these Mazier samples. Finally, it is hoped that a basically quantitative relationship between soil shear strength and SPT can be obtained as this would enable a soil shear strength profile to be established once the corresponding SPT profile has been determined on site by carrying out SPT in adequate number of drill holes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".