Effect of hydraulic conductivity and impeded drainage on the liquefaction potential of gravelly soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigating the role of sand and fines content and in situ drainage conditions in governing the hydraulic conductivity of gravelly deposits is highly important to characterize the liquefaction potential of gravelly soil. In this study, a variation of hydraulic conductivity with sand content has been empirically obtained based on the existing gravel liquefaction case histories. It is found that the hydraulic conductivity of a soil matrix having more than about 20%–30% sand content by mass is low enough to cause liquefaction without the presence of any impervious confining layer. In addition, a numerical study has been performed using the commercial software FEQDrain to study pore pressure generation in gravelly soil at a variety of relative densities and hydraulic conductivities with and without an impermeable cap layer when subjected to a variety of earthquake loadings. For both unconfined and confined condition, excess pore pressure ratios consistently increase with a decrease in hydraulic conductivity ( k) and relative density ( D r ). Excess pore pressure ratio is correlated with hydraulic conductivity, soil compressibility, and cyclic stress ratio (CSR). For the confined condition, pore pressure in the gravel layer is primarily governed by the overlying cap layer and even a sandy cap layer instead of highly impervious clay layer can cause liquefaction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".