AUSCULTACION DE SUELOS ESTABILIZADOS IN SITU CON CEMENTO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se expone la experiencia obtenida en la actuacion en dos obras en las que se han realizado estabilizaciones con cemento, recogiendose los aspectos singulares que han incidido de algun modo en la ejecucion de las obras, los materiales empleados y las tecnicas aplicadas para la realizacion de la estabilizacion. Asimismo se mencionan cuales han sido los metodos de control que se han utilizado y los valores a nivel global que se han obtenido. Ademas se desarrolla la auscultacion, utilizando equipos como el Curviametro MT-15 y la Placa de Carga Dinamica que aportan una informacion rapida sobre la capacidad de soporte. La auscultacion de alto rendimiento se presenta como un nuevo campo en el control de suelos estabilizados, que permite realizar las reparaciones puntuales, en el momento de ejecucion sin un alto sobrecoste y conocer la homogeneidad o no de la estabilizacion realizada. La homogeneidad de las explanadas estabilizadas se muestra como un factor fundamental en el mantenimiento de las prestaciones del firme a lo largo del tiempo, para conseguir indicadores del servicio al usuario, como el IRI, realmente buenos. Ver ficha general ITRD S404529.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".