MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386099076 · doi:10.3390/geotechnics3030045

Stochastic Finite Element Analysis of Root-Reinforcement Effects in Long and Steep Slopes

2023· article· en· W4386099076 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsFinite element methodMonte Carlo methodGeotechnical engineeringCohesion (chemistry)Range (aeronautics)PopulationMathematicsStatisticsGeologyStructural engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article introduces a novel numerical scheme within the finite element method (FEM) to study soil heterogeneity, specifically focusing on the root–soil matrix in fracture treatments. Material properties, such as Young’s modulus of elasticity, cohesion, and the friction angle, are considered as randomly distributed variables. To address the inherent uncertainty associated with these distributions, a Monte Carlo simulation is employed. By incorporating the uncertainties related to material properties, particularly the root component that contributes to soil heterogeneity, this article provides a reliable estimation of the factor of safety, failure surface, and slope deformation, all of which demonstrate a progressive behavior. The probability distribution curve for the factor of safety (FOS) reveals that an increase in the root area ratio (RAR) results in a narrower range and greater certainty in the population mean, indicating reduced material variation. Moreover, as the slope angle increases, the sample mean falls within a wider range of the probability density curve, indicating an enhanced level of material heterogeneity. This heterogeneity amplifies the level of uncertainty when predicting the factor of safety, highlighting the crucial importance of accurate information regarding heterogeneity to enhancing prediction accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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