MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406252461 · doi:10.3390/coatings15010070

Settlement Prediction for Cast-in-Place Tubular Piles with Large Diameters Based on the Load Transfer Approach

2025· article· en· W4406252461 on OpenAlexaff
Jiujiang Wu, Lin Xiao, Jifeng Lian, Lijuan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCoatings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlement (finance)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyTransfer (computing)Structural engineeringMaterials scienceMechanicsComputer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-diameter cast-in-place tubular piles offer high efficiency and adaptability for various engineering applications. Despite their widespread use, the bearing behavior of these piles remains complex due to the interactions with the internal soil core, and the related theoretical framework is not yet fully developed. In this study, a simplified load transfer model is proposed based on the pile–soil interaction mechanism of large-diameter tubular piles. Comprehensive load transfer models for the skin friction and end resistance of both the pile body and the soil core are established, supported by a detailed theoretical analysis. A novel three-criteria approach is introduced for the first time to enhance settlement predictions for large-diameter tubular piles by considering the displacement coordination mechanism of the internal soil core, addressing the limitations of traditional two-criteria methods. The proposed methods are validated through two engineering case studies, demonstrating their effectiveness and confirming their rationality and applicability in practical scenarios.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCoatingsSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207