MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3151886409 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-603-3-438

A Case Study of the Long-Term Deformation of Peat beneath an Embankment Structure

2015· book-chapter· en· W3151886409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
H. Michael, Tom Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueIOS Press eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatLeveeTerm (time)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringDeformation (meteorology)Environmental scienceGeographyArchaeologyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vast areas of northern Canada are covered by peat and wetlands. The number of engineering project built within peat-covered areas is increasing as resource and infrastructure development continues to expand in northern Canada. The prediction of settlements and deformations of structures built upon peat is notoriously difficult. This is further complicated as there are only a few well documented and published case studies on which to base judgment and performance predictions; and of those available, few have used contemporary instrumentation and data recording systems. This paper presents the results of an ongoing study of the long-term deformation of peat after the completion of embankment construction. The study site consists of an embankment bridge approach recently constructed upon peat. This embankment was instrumented to measure the pore pressures, settlement and horizontal deformation occurring within the embankment and the peat foundation. The analysis of three years of measured deformations and pore pressure showed that the long-term deformation is influenced by the generation and the seasonal temperature driven, expansion, and expulsion of gases.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOS Press eBooksSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207