Seismic response of pile groups improved with deep cement mixing columns in liquefiable sand: shaking table tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of shaking table model tests were performed to examine the effects of deep cement mixing (DCM) columns with different reinforcement depths on the seismic behavior of a pile group in liquefiable sand. Due to the DCM column reinforcement, the fundamental natural frequency of the model ground increases noticeably. The excess pore pressure of soils reduces with the increase of reinforcement depths of the DCM columns. Before liquefaction, the acceleration response of soils in the improved cases is obviously lower than that in the unimproved case, but the acceleration attenuation is greater after liquefaction in the unimproved case. Moreover, the lateral displacement of the superstructure, the settlement of the raft, and the bending moment of the piles in the improved cases are significantly reduced compared with those in the unimproved case, and the reduction ratios rise with the increase of reinforcement depth of the DCM columns. However, reinforcement by the DCM columns may result in the variation of the location of the maximum moment that occurs in the pile.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".