Verification of Seismic Cone Penetration Test Calibration Chamber Tests on a Sand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Calibration chambers are experimental apparatuses that allow the physical modeling of an in situ testing method, such as the cone penetration test (CPT), by performing laboratory experiments on soil samples with known stress, strain, and density characteristics. Over a series of development and improvements, more recent calibration chambers and laboratory cone penetrometers have become compact and less laborious than their predecessors. This includes the focus of this study where a miniature cone penetration testing (MCPT) calibration chamber previously designed and used at Western University is upgraded to measure shear wave velocity (VS) and enable anisotropic consolidation of soil specimens using a hydraulic piston. In addition to VS, MCPT can also measure cone tip resistance, sleeve friction, and excess pore water pressure developed behind the cone tip. A full test plan using the newly upgraded MCPT calibration chamber is presented in this study. These tests are performed on Fraser River sand at various relative densities and effective stresses. Results of this testing program are validated by comparison with a series of in situ seismic CPTs in the Fraser River delta, existing correlations between VS and cone tip resistance, and several other calibration chamber tests on different sands. Through these comparisons, the overall viability of the initial MCPT calibration chamber design, modifications made to the MCPT setup, and ultimately the results produced from this device are confirmed.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".