Measuring strength and consolidation properties in lacustrine clay using piezocone and self-boring pressuremeter tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a result of the growing population in Switzerland, new infrastructure is increasingly founded in areas of extremely soft clays, which are challenging to build on. Reliable characterization of such sediments is, therefore, essential to facilitate efficient and economical designs. For various reasons, it is often beneficial to measure soil properties in situ, using probes like the piezocone or self-boring pressuremeter. The main objective of this study was to explore the key differences of these two site investigation techniques in terms of measuring undrained strength and consolidation characteristics in varved lacustrine clay. Experimental data from a field-testing campaign carried out in Switzerland demonstrate that both probes yield comparable results. The quality of the predictions was further assessed by comparing the field measurements to results from laboratory tests and existing empirical relationships. Additionally, a new method based on Monte Carlo simulations was presented, to provide context to the disparity between the consolidation coefficients estimated in the field ( ch) and laboratory ( cv), and to aid prediction of field values of ch from laboratory measurements.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".