MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399712370 · doi:10.3208/jgssp.v10.os-11-06

Influence of ground motion characteristics on liquefaction-induced pipe uplift

2024· article· en· W4399712370 on OpenAlexaff
Devdeep Basu, Dharma Wijewickreme

Bibliographic record

VenueJapanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiquefactionGeotechnical engineeringGeologyGround motionSoil liquefactionSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil liquefaction occurring due to earthquakes poses severe risk to both above-ground structures as well as buried structures such as pipes, manholes etc. During liquefaction, the shear strength of the soil above and around the pipeline could decrease due to build-up of excess pore pressures and, subsequently, resulting in buoyancy forces that could cause the pipelines to displace and potentially “float up” towards the ground surface. Limit-equilibrium based procedures allow for prediction of uplift occurrence, but predicting the magnitude of uplift is a complex task with a number of components such as soil type, pipe diameter (D) and burial depth (H), pipe boundary constraints, and earthquake motion contributing to this mechanism. This study utilizes a well-calibrated and validated 2D numerical model to investigate the effects of input motion characteristics on pipe uplift for a steel pipe buried in a saturated, loose, and homogeneous deposit of Fraser River sand. The commercially available finite difference FLAC software and soil constitutive model PM4Sand were utilized. The influence of input motion amplitude and duration on uplift behavior of pipe was examined and discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJapanese Geotechnical Society Special PublicationSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207