Undrained behaviour of fibre reinforced cemented toyoura sand in triaxial compression and extension loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the effects of fibre (0–3%) and cement (0–3%) additives on poorly graded Toyoura sand under consolidated undrained (CIU) compression and extension conditions. Compression tests revealed that dense sands exhibit increased peak strength, stiffness, and a steady decline from peak to post-peak strength. Cemented and fibre-cemented specimens demonstrated stiffer responses and strain-hardening post-peak behavior compared to pure sand. Adding fibres and cement significantly enhanced peak deviatoric stresses, while their impact under extension loading was less pronounced. Fibre and cement combinations, particularly at higher percentages, improved the strength of pure sand under extension conditions. Randomly oriented fibres increased friction angle, cohesion, and compressive strength, while cemented and fibre-cemented specimens exhibited higher secant moduli. The additives enhanced strength parameters, the slope of the critical state line, and the state parameter, with the stress ratio (q/p’) rising for both peak and critical states.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".