Using a genetic algorithm to develop a pile design method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A genetic algorithm (GA) was used in this study to develop a standard penetration test (SPT)-based design method for the axial capacity of driven piles. A total of 72 pile load tests was collected from literature and divided into two groups based on their measurements. The first group had the load-transfer distribution measurements for extracting both the unit side and tip resistances. These unit resistances were correlated by the GA with soil measurements and pile properties to develop the design method. The second group, where only the total capacity measurements were available, were used to validate the new design method and compare its performance with three existing SPT-based design methods. The new GA-derived design method considers nonlinear relationships with the effective stress and pile length and provides an unbiased prediction with a low coefficient of variation (COV) of 40.0 %, while the three existing methods overestimate the capacity by a factor of 1.62 to 1.65 with a high COV of 40.3 % to 52.8 %, which could result in an under design of pile foundations. This study shows that the GA was able to obtain complex relationships with great accuracy and the new design method can be applied to new cases reasonably well.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".