Dynamic Soil Reactions around a Beam-on-Multiple-Piles Structure and their Application in the Parallel Seismic Integrity Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, an analytical solution to the dynamic reaction of half-space soil around a beam-on-multiple-piles structure is proposed. This can be used to evaluate the effect of an adjacent vibrating pile of unequal length or pile defects on parallel seismic (PS) integrity test results. The structure–soil interaction (SSI) problem was decomposed into a beam–multiple-pile coupled vibrating model and an extended half-space soil model. The surrounding soil reactions were calculated employing the half-space soil excited by known vibration (HEKV) solution scheme. The HEKV solution scheme and the accuracy of the analytical results were validated through comparisons with finite-element analysis (FEA). The validated model was then used to study the influence of an adjacent vibrating pile on the pile response, and to optimize the selection of technical parameters for the PS test. The obtained results were used to discuss the uncertainties of the PS test in terms of multiple-pile foundations and adjacent vibrating piles, and to develop the theoretical basis for testing multiple-pile foundations. Finally, practical guidance is provided for the application of the PS test to multiple-pile foundations in practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".