Study on Dynamic Evolution of the Landslide–Anchorage Structure System Under Earthquake with the Combined Finite–Discrete Element Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The landslides caused by slope instability are very harmful and have a destructive effect on existing engineering structures such as tunnels, bridges, and houses. At present, the dynamic design of the anchorage structure is mainly based on traditional statics, which fails to fully consider the dynamic evolution process of landslide and its synergistic mechanism with anchorage structure. It is urgent to study the landslide–anchorage structure system considering both the catastrophic process and the evolution process. Based on the advanced combined finite–discrete element method (FDEM), the present study investigates the dynamic response characteristics and evolution process of the landslide–anchorage structure system by adding the dynamic strength reduction method considering the vibration deterioration effect of the structural plane and the combined one-dimensional and entity element model. The results show that the improved FDEM can accurately reproduce the characteristics of the dynamic response and the entire process of the landslide–anchorage structure system and can quantitatively evaluate the dynamic stability of the system. Through the setting of the two working conditions of unreinforced and reinforced slopes, it is verified that the addition of anchor cables can significantly reduce the dynamic response of the slopes. It is also found that the axial force is larger at the structural plane and the failure surface, and the PGA amplification factor positively correlates with the axial force of the anchor cables. The study reveals the dynamic response characteristics and evolution law of the landslide–anchorage structure system under earthquake, which can provide a scientific basis for the reasonable aseismic design of the landslide–anchorage structure system.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".