MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401052841 · doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2024.03.038

3D slope stability analysis considering strength anisotropy by a micro-structure tensor enhanced elasto-plastic finite element method

2024· article· en· W4401052841 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wencheng Wei, Hongxiang Tang, Xiaoyu Song, Xiangji Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAnisotropySlope stabilityFinite element methodSlope stability analysisGeotechnical engineeringStability (learning theory)GeologyLandslideSafety factorStructural engineeringGeometryMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a micro-structure tensor enhanced elasto-plastic finite element (FE) method to address strength anisotropy in three-dimensional (3D) soil slope stability analysis. The gravity increase method (GIM) is employed to analyze the stability of 3D anisotropic soil slopes. The accuracy of the proposed method is first verified against the data in the literature. We then simulate the 3D soil slope with a straight slope surface and the convex and concave slope surfaces with a 90° turning corner to study the 3D effect on slope stability and the failure mechanism under anisotropy conditions. Based on our numerical results, the end effect significantly impacts the failure mechanism and safety factor. Anisotropy degree notably affects the safety factor, with higher degrees leading to deeper landslides. For concave slopes, they can be approximated by straight slopes with suitable boundary conditions to assess their stability. Furthermore, a case study of the Saint-Alban test embankment A in Quebec, Canada, is provided to demonstrate the applicability of the proposed FE model.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations24
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207