Settlement characteristics and evaluation approach of embankment widening over soft clay
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Embankment widening alongside an existing embankment causes additional stress and differential settlement on the foundation beneath the embankment, which may have adverse effects on pavements. The settlement profiles of the existing and widened foundations beneath an embankment are governed by several geometric and physical parameters related to embankment widening. An accurate settlement evaluation method is essential for the determination of an appropriate ground improvement technique. In this paper, a simplified method for predicting the settlement of the soft foundation induced by embankment widening is proposed. A validated finite element method model was first employed to quantify the effect of geometric parameters and soil properties on the settlement characteristics. Furthermore, a simplified model based on the bi-Gaussian function was developed to illustrate the settlement profiles. The results obtained by the proposed model are in good agreement with previously reported centrifuge test results and a generated numerical database, demonstrating that the proposed model has satisfactory accuracy. The developed prediction model offers an alternative approach for the preliminary design of embankment widening.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it