Centrifuge Model Tests at Zhejiang University for LEAP-ASIA-2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two centrifuge models with the same target relative density (Dr = 65%) were conducted in different centrifugal acceleration (30 g for Model-A and 15 g for Model-B) at Zhejiang University (ZJU) to validate generalized scaling law in the program of LEAP-ASIA-2019. The same model used in LEAP-UCD-2017 was repeated, representing a 5-degree slope consisting of saturated Ottawa F-65 sand. This chapter describes test facilities, instrumentations layout, and test procedures. Uncertainty analysis is also carried out in input parameters (e.g., achieved peak ground acceleration, achieved density and the degree of saturation). The test results of acceleration, excess pore water pressures, and displacement etc. were compared at prototype scale to check the validity of the generalized scaling law (GSL). The preliminary experiment results of Zhejiang University show that the Type II generalized scaling law is applicable to the acceleration response while has a weak applicability to the displacement response.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".