Relationship between monotonic and cyclic behavior of saturated soft clay in undrained triaxial compression tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyclic loading–induced deformation of soil is a common problem in engineering practice. In current practice, however, monotonic triaxial tests are more commonly used due to the availability of apparatus and ease of operation. Thus, it would be very useful and practical if monotonic triaxial tests could be used to evaluate the behavior of soil under cyclic loading. This study aims to find an explicit relationship between monotonic and cyclic behavior of saturated soft clay. Six monotonic and nine cyclic triaxial compression tests were conducted on undisturbed saturated soft clay under an undrained condition. The test results showed that the monotonic and cyclic tests shared the same stress–strain surface in a three-dimensional p′–q–εa space (p′, effective mean principal stress; q, deviatoric stress; εa, axial strain). It was also found that it is possible to evaluate the effective stress states of cyclic tests at two specific numbers of cycles, using corresponding monotonic tests. Based on these two findings, a simple procedure is proposed to predict the peak axial strain for the saturated soft clay under different cyclic loadings based on the monotonic tests and only one cyclic test, which was further verified against additional test data from the previous literature.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".