A Review of Static and Dynamic p-y Curve Models for Pile Foundations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In addition to supporting vertical loads from superstructures, piles are frequently subjected to horizontal soil pressures, long-term wind, wave, and current forces, as well as seismic loads. Presently, the p-y curve method is widely employed for calculating the horizontal forces acting on piles due to its ability to replicate the nonlinear interaction between piles and soil. This paper provides a thorough review and analysis of the current research on p-y curve models for piles, examining literature across various conditions such as horizontal static loads, cyclic loads, and seismic loads. Special emphasis is placed on the development, classification, and analysis of the key factors influencing major p-y curve models. It also discusses future research directions and prospects, considering emerging trends and prevailing challenges in the field. For instance, future studies should investigate p-y curves for piles under various combined loads, considering the influence of construction methods and the installation effect. Additionally, the development of a comprehensive p-y curve database and the application of existing research to new foundation systems are essential for advancing pile technology and fostering innovative designs.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".