An upper-bound solution for ground collapse induced by shallow rectangular cavity in unsaturated soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground collapse occurs frequently due to the roof or roof–sides breakdown of shallow cavities, but analytical solutions considering both types of failures remains a challenge and without incorporating the unsaturated characteristics of shallow soils. This study presents an analytical solution for the collapse of shallow rectangular cavities in unsaturated soils. Proposing a critical cover depth to differentiate deep and shallow cavities. Results show that the collapse type (roof or roof–sides) in shallow cavities depends on the width at collapse. It varies significantly with matric suction, displaying two patterns: increasing and stabilizing, or increasing, decreasing, and stabilizing. The variation trend of width at collapse with matric suction aligns with that of apparent cohesion, with a peak near the air-entry value when the fitting parameter n is relatively large (such as n = 3 or 4). The air-entry value influences the magnitude rather than the shape of the variation curves. Additionally, shallow cavities with small cover depths tend toward roof failure, while those with large cover depths, especially with significant height, are more prone to roof–sides failure. Increasing surface surcharge can reduce collapse width, shifting towards roof–sides failure, especially with low cohesion or internal friction angle.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".