Geostress-associated settlements of a raft-foundation building due to shield tunnelling in soft ground
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stress state of soil may affect the building settlements induced by tunnelling, which, however, has not been well understood. In this study, three dimensional numerical analyses combined with in situ measurements were performed to investigate the geostress-associated settlements of a raft-foundation building due to tunnelling in soft ground. Basically, two types of geostress fields were investigated: the first type considered the effect of additional stress generated in the foundation soil (FAS) due to building weight, while in the second type, a sequential twin tunnelling was presumed, and the effect of additional soil stress induced by the first tunnel (TAS) on the building response to the second tunnel was considered. The results indicated that FAS may aggravate the stress release of the foundation soil, and thus gave rise to a larger building settlement or inclination. In the sequential tunnelling process, the effect of TAS can be more complex: when the first tunnel lowered the stress of foundation soil, TAS effect of the first tunnel may help reduce the building settlements induced by the second tunnel; otherwise, it may aggravate building settlements. In addition to TAS effect, the sheltering effect was also found to play an important part in twin tunnelling.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".