On effects of a sudden increase of atmospheric pressure on unsaturated tropical soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In January 2011, catastrophic landslides occurred in Rio de Janeiro. Still, rainwater infiltration in the unsaturated slopes was not considered the only reason for the deflagration of the slides, and investigations were started to evaluate if further environmental events could help to explain the disaster onset. Knowing that thunderclaps cause an abrupt increase in atmospheric pressure during tropical rainstorms, a research program was set to evaluate if such events could compromise the stability of unsaturated soil slopes. To do so, the results of triaxial experiments conducted on two unsaturated soils from Rio de Janeiro's natural slopes are presented and analyzed. Triaxial tests were run in a double-walled cell with bender elements located at the top and bottom of the specimens, and the total specimen volume change was measured. To simulate an abrupt increase in atmospheric pressure, air pressure peaks were applied at the top of the specimens before shearing under constant moisture content. Shearing was conducted under two net stresses and matric suctions. Comparing the stress–strain–strength and shear-wave velocity data of similar specimens with and without a sudden increase in air pressure, it was found that an increase in air pressure impacted the mechanical behaviour of the unsaturated soils.
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".