Re-liquefaction resistance of lightly cemented sands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The re-liquefaction resistance of cemented sands under multiple liquefaction events such as pre-shock, main-shock, and after-shock earthquakes is a complex phenomenon because the response may alter due to bond breakage. A series of multistage liquefaction–re-consolidation soil element tests under undrained stress-controlled cyclic loading condition using cyclic triaxial were carried out to assess the liquefaction and re-liquefaction resistance of cemented sands with varying degrees of cementation. Lightly cemented specimens were reconstituted using Sydney sand and high early strength Portland cement with cement content ranging from 0.25% to 1% and unconfined compression strength from 15 to 80 kPa. The results showed that the re-liquefaction resistance of cemented sands with different amounts of cement decreased after the first liquefaction event and then increased for succeeding liquefaction events. While the trend of residual excess pore water pressure ratio and cyclic stiffness degradation index of untreated sand under successive liquefaction events remained consistent, the corresponding responses for cemented sands altered for the second to the fifth liquefaction events. In fact, the residual excess pore water pressure ratio and cyclic stiffness of cemented sand increased and degraded faster during the early cycles of loading for the second to fifth liquefaction events.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".