A Comparative Study of Embedded Wall Displacements Using Small-Strain Hardening Soil Model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional analysis of embedded earth-retaining walls relies on simplistic lateral earth pressure theory methods, which do not allow for direct computation of wall displacements. Contemporary numerical models rely on the Mohr–Coulomb model, which generally falls short of accurate wall displacement prediction. The advanced constitutive small-strain hardening soil model (SS-HSM), effectively captures complex nonlinear soil behavior. However, its application is currently limited, as SS-HSM requires multiple input parameters, rendering numerical modeling a challenging and time-consuming task. This study presents an extensive numerical investigation, where wall displacements from numerical models are compared to empirical findings from a large and reliable database. A novel automated computational scheme is created for model generation and advanced data analysis is undertaken for this objective. The main findings indicate that the SS-HSM can provide realistic predictions of wall displacements. Ultimately, a range of input parameters for the utilization of SS-HSM in earth-retaining wall analysis is established, providing a good starting point for engineers and researchers seeking to model more complex scenarios of embedded walls with the SS-HSM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it