Effects of geometry and soil properties on type and retrogression of landslides in sensitive clays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flowslide and spread are two common types of landslides in sensitive clays. Empirical criteria, based on single or multiple soil properties and slope geometry, have been proposed for a rough assessment of potential landslide type and retrogression distance. A large variation has been found in the comparison of retrogression distance between empirical equations and field data. In the present study, flowslides and spreads are simulated using a Eulerian-based large-deformation finite-element (FE) method. In addition to strain-softening, a strain-rate-dependent undrained shear strength model that elevates the strain rate effects on the shear strength of liquefied clay flowing at high speed is used. In flowslides, a higher rate of increase in undrained shear strength with depth reduces the depth of subsequent slides, and thereby the retrogression distance. The maximum retrogression occurs for a uniform shear strength profile. The increase in the ratio of horizontal to vertical stress, resistance to downslope movement of the debris and decrease in soil brittleness and slope steepness change the failure pattern from a flowslide to a spread.
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".