MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396686854 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2023-0484

Factors influencing suffusion-induced delayed displacement of river bridge piers

2024· article· en· W4396686854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yoshihiro Nishio, Kenji Watanabe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringGeologyPierDisplacement (psychology)Bridge (graph theory)Forensic engineeringStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, local scour has occurred on the pier foundations of river bridges during heavy rain and river flooding, often resulting in bridge collapse and outflow. This study focused on the characteristic displacement, called “delayed displacement”, of the river bridge pier. The critical displacement of the piers was first observed several days after the flood when the train passed and not immediately after the flood. The authors hypothesized that one of the possible reasons for the delayed displacement is the suffusion of the supporting ground beneath the pier foundation during the flood, followed by a compressive behavior due to the collapse of the soil skeleton under repeated traffic loads. Accordingly, this study performed erosion tests simulating flood and cyclic loading tests simulating train passage using a triaxial test apparatus to check the validity of this hypothesis. In some test cases, suffusion without any deformation occurred in the erosion test but deformed in the cyclic loading test just after the erosion test. This behavior matches the behavior of delayed displacement. It was also suggested that the risk of the delayed displacement becomes high when the soil skeleton was assumed to primarily comprise fine particles, and the void ratio and hydraulic gradient were high. By contrast, when the soil skeleton was assumed to primarily comprise coarse particles, suffusion occurred in the erosion test, but did not deform in the subsequent cyclic loading test. Thus, the risk of delayed displacement is considered to be low when coarse particles are dominant. Furthermore, clear relationship between suffusion and the consequent reduction in soil stiffness cannot be observed. This result indicates that no significant change in the stiffness occur in the supporting ground of the pier foundation at the stage immediately before the delayed displacement. Thus, identifying the deterioration in the stability of the piers through impact loading test, which is based on the concept that local scour reduces the natural frequency of the bridge pier, is difficult.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures→French-language works237,207→