Modelling volumetric and strength behaviours of sheared contact zone between dam soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interface behaviour between different granular material layers in geotechnical works, such as embankment dams, can affect their overall behaviour. Soil–structure interfaces have been widely studied but few analyses of soil–soil granular interfaces have been conducted. Therefore, there is a need to properly predict their behaviour. The mechanical behaviour of an interface zone between embankment dam materials, a core and a filter soils, is numerically studied during a laminar simple shear test. The main objectives are to properly reproduce the shear strength of interface layer and its deformation, including the volumetric behaviour. The interface behaviour is analysed based on hypotheses related to the interface zone, to the contact reproduction between the soil layers, and to the constitutive models used for the soils and their contact. The modelling of the shear test is performed to highlight the important aspects to consider in numerical simulation of granular interface layer. Using a model for granular soils based on the critical state concept (NorSand model) allows for prediction of the soil–soil interface shear strength and especially its volumetric deformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".