COMPLETE AND SEMI-COMPLETE EXPLICIT ALGORITHMS OF A UNIFIED CRITICAL STATE MODEL FOR OVER-CONSOLIDATED SOILS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a comparison of the performance of explicit algorithm and semi-complete explicit algorithm in the numerical implementations of an unconventional plastic model for soils. The new model, named CASM-S, is developed by incorporating the sub-loading surface theory into the standard unified clay and sand model (i.e., CASM), to enhance the prediction ability for the mechanical behavior of over-consolidated soils. The complete explicit algorithm of CASM-S is based on the sub-stepping method with the technique of automatic error control (SUBM), while the semi-complete explicit algorithm adopts the cutting-plane integration procedure (CPM). The complete implementation process of this model is performed, and the stability, accuracy, and efficiency of these two algorithms are compared through a series of numerical simulations, such as fluid-structure coupling problem, over-consolidation problem, and square-footing problem. These simulations demonstrate that CASM-S implemented by both the SUBM and CPM can obtain a reliable solution under appropriate size of increments. For the sub-loading surface model with highly nonlinear characteristics used in this paper, the CPM has faster local convergence rate, but the SUBM shows a higher efficiency and accuracy at global level.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it