MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392103710 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-48821-4_8

LEAP-ASIA-2019 Centrifuge Tests at University Gustave Eiffel

2024· book-chapter· en· W4392103710 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sandra Escoffier, Zheng Li, Philippe Audrain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEiffelCentrifugeComputer sciencePhysicsOperating systemNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the framework of the LEAP-ASIA-2019 exercise, two dynamic centrifuge tests on a gentle slope of saturated Ottawa F-65 sand have been performed at the centrifuge of University Gustave Eiffel. These tests were conducted in parallel with other tests performed in nine other centrifuge centers. In addition to the objectives of the LEAP-UCD-2017 (comparison of the experimental results, e.g., effect of the experimental procedure or of test parameters on the results, and providing of a database for numerical modeling), the new objective was to evaluate, through the tested configuration, the generalized scaling approach described by Iai et al. (Géotechnique 55(5):355–362, 2005). In this framework, all the centrifuge teams have performed two types of tests. Considering the same prototype geometry, the first test was performed following the classical approach used in centrifuge modeling, and the second test was performed considering the generalized scaling law (GSL). Following the test matrix and test specifications of LEAP-ASIA-2019, University Gustave Eiffel has performed two model tests (test A2 renamed UGE-1/50-62 and test A3 renamed UGE-2/25-62). The two tests have been performed on a slope sand with the same relative density (62%) considering a target motion PGA eff = 0.3 g (1 Hz ramped sine at the prototype scale). In this paper, the test setup and the deviations from the specifications such as the experimental setup improvement that have followed the LEAP-UCD-2017 tests are presented in detail. The results obtained from the two tests are then provided at the prototype scale for comparison. The obtained input base motions are first presented followed by the characterization of the soil through CPT profiles. The responses of the saturated sand slopes for both tests are then detailed through the analysis of the pore pressure buildup, the accelerations in the soil, and the displacements measured through surface markers and embedded sensors. Some preliminary results of the global scaling approach are then discussed.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.157 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207