MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285043654 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2021-0475

New model of shear modulus degradation and damping ratio curves for sensitive Canadian clays

2022· article· en· W4285043654 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mustapha Abdellaziz, Mourad Karray, Marie-Christine Delisle, Pascal Locat, Catherine Ledoux, Rémi Mompin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsMinistère des TransportsHydro-QuébecUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShear modulusGeotechnical engineeringDamping ratioPlasticitySoil waterIndex (typography)MathematicsRegression analysisShear (geology)GeologyMineralogyStatisticsMaterials scienceSoil sciencePhysicsComposite materialComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated a new predictive model of the shear modulus reduction ([Formula: see text]) and damping ratio ( ξ − Log ( γ c )) curves for sensitive eastern Canada clays. The model was established based on experimental measurements of [Formula: see text] and ξ performed on 69 sensitive clay specimens from eastern Canada. The compiled database was first analyzed to qualitatively assess the influences of different soil parameters on the measurements. Next, statistical analyses using regression analysis and the modified hyperbolic model were performed. It was found that the [Formula: see text] and ξ values of sensitive eastern Canada clays were influenced mainly by the plasticity index ( I p ), mean effective stress [Formula: see text], and structure, which was quantified by the liquidity index ( I L ). Based on the statistical analysis performed, new equations for [Formula: see text] and ξ were proposed. The newly proposed model was compared with previously published models. The comparison clearly showed that the proposed model was more representative of sensitive eastern Canada clays. Consequently, it is suggested that the proposed model is more appropriate for use in the dynamic analysis of sensitive eastern Canada clay deposits as well as other similar soils.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207