MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094411090 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2020-0102

Upper-bound analysis of laterally loaded rigid monopiles in clay with linearly increasing strength

2020· article· en· W3094411090 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jian Yu, Hongyu Wang, Maosong Huang, C. F. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWedge (geometry)PileGeotechnical engineeringFailure mechanismFinite element methodGeologyOffshore wind powerOffshore geotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematicsWind powerGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monopiles supporting offshore wind farms are often subject to severe lateral environmental loads due to wind, waves, and currents. Previous studies have reported various failure patterns for such rigid monopiles in clay; hence predicting lateral pile capacity of widely different magnitudes. In this study, both a single-sided wedge failure mechanism involving passive soil failure only and a two-sided wedge failure mechanism with simultaneous active and passive soil failures are proposed. The single wedge mechanism is found to be applicable if the soil behind the pile does not move together with the pile, resulting in a gap between the soil and the pile upon loading. In contrast, the two-sided wedge is found appropriate for the soil behind the pile that moves together with the pile upon loading. Two formulations are then derived from the two upper-bound failure mechanisms. The lateral pile capacity can be determined and the corresponding failure mechanism identified based on the formulation that yields the lower capacity magnitude. In addition, the reliability of the formulations is verified against reported finite element methods as well as existing experimental and field test results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207