MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174410045 · doi:10.11159/icgre21.lx.112

Study of the Influence of Sheet Pile Location under Dams on Groundwater Flow and Pore Pressure with Network Method

2021· article· en· W3174410045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Encarnación Martínez‐Moreno, Gonzalo García‐Ros, Iván Alhama

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSheet pileGroundwaterPileGroundwater flowFlow (mathematics)Geotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologyPetroleum engineeringMechanicsAquifer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of a gravity dam leads to some verifications that may affect its safety, such as groundwater flow or pore pressure distribution under the structure. These phenomena, which are related to piping and the position of the uplift force, can be controlled by placing a sheet pile under the dam. The variables are commonly studied as if the soil was isotropic, simplifying universal results (either graphics or formulations). However, this assumption does not reflect real scenarios in most of the cases, for example anisotropic hydraulic conductivities. In this work, the effects of the sheet pile position in four different cases is studied: dam without a sheet pile and dam with a sheet pile located at the heel, centre and toe of the structure. In all of them two different media are modelled, with isotropic and anisotropic hydraulic conductivities, so its influence can be appraised from the point of view of safety. The scenarios are simulated with a tool based on the network method that, employing the electrical analogy, obtains the problem variables, 'hydraulic potential' (h) and 'water flow' (Q), solving electric quantities, 'voltage' (V) and 'electric current' (I), respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207