MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048211335 · doi:10.1201/9781003077749-25

A probabilistic slope stability analysis using deterministic computer software

2020· book-chapter· en· W3048211335 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Dai, D G Fredlund, W. J. Stolte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceStability (learning theory)SoftwareProbabilistic analysis of algorithmsAlgorithmProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A designation of the probability of failure of a slope can add further understanding to its behaviour, over and above a conventional factor of safety. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how a deterministic slope stability package can be made into a probabilistic software package or used in a probabilistic manner. The same general procedure could be applied to any deterministic computer program. A slope stability example was set up to be solved in the conventional manner using a deterministic software package (i.e., PC-SLOPE). Additional, independent code was developed to generate statistical data in order that the deterministic solution could be repeatedly executed to give a probabilistic evaluation of the same example. Normal frequency distributions relative to variations in cohesion, angle of internal friction and pore-water pressure were studied. From the mean values and the standard deviations of the cohesion, angle of internal friction and pore-water pressure, along with the correlation relationship between cohesion and angle of internal friction, sets of random values of the cohesion, angle of internal friction and pore-water pressure were generated using the Monte Carlo method and the Point Estimate method. Each set of these values of cohesion, angle of internal friction and pore-water pressure generated were then used in the deterministic software package to compute a factor of safety. Further code was written to read the output factors of safety files and to analyze the results. In this way, the probability distribution of the factor of safety was obtained for a specific slip surface. The reliability in terms of the probability of factor of safety being greater than or equal to 1.0 was also computed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.204
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207