MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410457849 · doi:10.1016/j.rineng.2025.105362

Approaches to the stability analysis of slopes subjected to seismic loading: A review

2025· review· en· W4410457849 on OpenAlex
Zeinab Bayati, Ali Saeidi, Meghdad Payan

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueResults in Engineering · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersLuonnontieteiden ja Tekniikan Tutkimuksen ToimikuntaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHydro-Québec
KeywordsGeologyStability (learning theory)Geotechnical engineeringSeismologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Offering a comprehensive review of existing seismic slope stability analysis methods and providing a valuable resource for geotechnical engineers to identify the most effective Seismic Slope Stability Analysis methods for different scenarios. • Comparing various analytical and numerical methods and highlighting their respective advantages and limitations. • Exploring diverse load application techniques in seismic stability analysis and shedding light on the critical factors influencing the accuracy and reliability of slope stability assessments during earthquakes. • Identifying the key parameters and conditions affecting the performance of different seismic slope stability analysis methods and offering insights into optimizing these approaches for improved safety and accuracy. The recurrence of slope failures during past catastrophic earthquakes has led to substantial loss of life and structural damage. As a result, assessing earthquake-induced landslides remains a critical focus in geohazard research. While numerous methods have been developed to evaluate the seismic stability of slopes, they vary in assumptions and accuracy. However, most approaches follow one of two fundamental philosophies: calculating a factor of safety (FS) against sliding failure or estimating the permanent displacement upon failure. This paper provides a comprehensive review of various analytical and numerical approaches used for seismic slope stability analysis, serving as a guideline for selecting the most suitable method for evaluating earthquake-triggered landslides. The strengths and limitations of each approach are highlighted to aid in informed decision-making. The primary methods discussed include the pseudo-static approach, the pseudo-dynamic approach, the permanent displacement technique, and stress-deformation analysis. Additionally, advanced approaches with potential applications in large deformation seismic analysis of slopes are examined. Findings indicate that while stress-deformation analysis offers several advantages over pseudo-static, pseudo-dynamic and permanent displacement methods, these benefits come at the cost of increased complexity, requiring more time and effort for problem formulation, material characterization, result interpretation, and significantly higher computational resources. Ultimately, the selection of an appropriate method should be based on the required level of accuracy, project-specific needs, available data, and the complexity necessary to capture the critical aspects of the problem.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.013
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.200 · 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