MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401409639 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2023-0555

Numerical investigation on the pullout capacity of suction caissons in silty sand-over-clay deposit

2024· article· en· W4401409639 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ningxin Yang, Mi Zhou, Yinghui Tian, Xihong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCaissonCentrifugeGeotechnical engineeringSuctionGeologyFinite element methodBearing capacityParametric statisticsEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research offers an in-depth numerical analysis on the pullout capacity of suction caissons in sand-over-clay deposits. A validated finite element (FE) model is employed and cross-referenced with existing centrifuge tests and numerical data. A parametric analysis is conducted to examine the variables affecting the pullout capacity of suction caissons, including caisson’s length, pad-eye position, and layered deposits. The FE analysis yields some insights into the following key design components: (i) the optimal pad-eye locations; (ii) the ultimate horizontal and vertical bearing capacities; and (iii) the horizontal load estimation at various pad-eyes attachments. A straightforward guideline for calculating the caisson’s pullout capacities is then established for preliminary estimations for suction caissons in silty sand-over-clay deposit.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207