MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211017526 · doi:10.1201/9781003188339-25

Considering multiple failure modes: A comparison of probabilistic analysis and multi-modal optimization for a 3D slope stability case study

2021· book-chapter· en· W4211017526 on OpenAlexaff
Brigid Cami, Terence Ma, Sina Javankhoshdel, Thamer Yacoub, Brent Corkum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsRocscience (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModalProbabilistic logicStability (learning theory)Structural engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsEngineeringStatisticsMaterials scienceMachine learningComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limit equilibrium (LE) slope stability analysis methods are typically combined with global search methods to locate a single critical slip surface, which corresponds to the minimum factor of safety for a topographical model. However, in complicated 3D models there often exist multiple modes of failure with similar factors of safety within the topography. In such cases, it is necessary to consider multiple slip surfaces in the design process rather than just a single surface. To achieve such a goal, this paper proposes two different methods: 1) probabilistic analysis with stochastic response surfaces (SRS), and 2) the Locally Informed Particle Swarm with Radius Filter (LIPS-R) niching algorithm. SRS is a very fast and effective alternative to Monte Carlo or Latin Hypercube sampling of rock and soil material parameters for probabilistic analysis. LIPS-R is a multi-modal optimization (MMO) algorithm based on a niching method called locally informed particle swarm (LIPS). The purpose of MMO algorithms is to output multiple local minima solutions for a given optimization problem. A 3D case study is presented in this paper where both methods are demonstrated to identify multiple failure modes for an open pit mine. Despite the differences between the proposed methodologies, the failure modes identified in both cases are shown to agree.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207