Recovery of small-strain stiffness following blast-induced liquefaction based on shear wave velocity measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in soil fabric following liquefaction have been studied using various in situ methods that often return inconclusive or conflicting observations. The time–rate variation of stiffness, when observed, is usually not evaluated over significant periods of time, limiting investigations about aging in post-liquefaction regain of stiffness. Even more uncommon is the application of geophysical techniques to evaluate changes in shear wave velocity (V S ) as a proxy for small-strain stiffness. This study uses controlled blasting to examine long-term post-liquefaction regain of stiffness following multiple blast events. The multi-channel analysis of surface waves (MASW) technique was used to observe changes in V S of aged deposits at a test site in South Carolina. Blast-induced liquefaction of the target liquefiable layer resulted in significant reduction to its initial small-strain stiffness owing to the destruction of the aged soil fabric. The time-rate variation in V S indicated that the initial small-strain stiffness was not re-established over many months following liquefaction. Following a second blast event, the small-strain stiffness reduced again, but recovered more quickly, similar to previously reported observations of young sand deposits. This study provides a significant basis for interpreting in situ body and surface wave measurements of aged and young sand deposits densified using blast liquefaction.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".