Bibliographic record
Abstract
Model Uncertainties in Foundation Design is unique in the compilation of the largest and the most diverse load test databases to date, covering many foundation types (shallow foundations, spudcans, driven piles, drilled shafts, rock sockets and helical piles) and a wide range of ground conditions (soil to soft rock). All databases with names prefixed by NUS are available upon request. This book presents a comprehensive evaluation of the model factor mean (bias) and coefficient of variation (COV) for ultimate and serviceability limit state based on these databases. These statistics can be used directly for AASHTO LRFD calibration. Besides load test databases, performance databases for other geo-structures and their model factor statistics are provided. Based on this extensive literature survey, a practical three-tier scheme for classifying the model uncertainty of geo-structures according to the model factor mean and COV is proposed. This empirically grounded scheme can underpin the calibration of resistance factors as a function of the degree of understanding – a concept already adopted in the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code and being considered for the new draft for Eurocode 7 Part 1 (EN 1997-1:202x). The helical pile research in Chapter 7 was recognised by the 2020 ASCE Norman Medal.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".