MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414077822 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2025-0276

3D dynamic response analysis of the Denis-Perron Rockfill Dam in a narrow valley

2025· article· en· W4414077822 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Daniel Verret, Denis LeBœuf

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHydro-Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHydro-Québec
KeywordsInstrumentation (computer programming)Parametric statisticsCrestResponse analysisSeismic analysisProcess (computing)Site analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic analysis of rockfill dams in narrow valleys poses challenges in representing material behavior, complex wave propagation, and three-dimensional (3D) site effects. This study addresses these issues through a combined parametric and validation analysis of the Denis-Perron Dam—the largest rockfill dam in Eastern Canada—using instrumental data from earthquakes and ambient vibrations. Progressive modeling in 1D, 2D+, and 3D approaches shows that valley geometry strongly influences seismic response when the width-to-height ratio ( L/H) is below 4. For the Denis-Perron Dam ( L/H = 2.21), 3D simulations produced crest amplification factors of 6–8 at the fundamental frequency (∼2 Hz) under nonlinear conditions, compared to 4–5 in 2D analyses, with site effects concentrated in the upper third of the dam. Validation against records from the 1999 M5.1 earthquake confirmed the predictive capacity of the 3D model, while simulations of a historical M5.9 event indicated that high-frequency motions (>10 Hz) typical of Eastern Canada reduce—but do not eliminate—significant side effects. Beyond the technical results, the study demonstrates the feasibility of advanced 3D dynamic modeling when supported by a structured development and validation process and underscores the critical role of high-quality seismic instrumentation both for dam safety monitoring and for understanding complex dam–valley interaction phenomena. These findings inform seismic design criteria, safety evaluation, and instrumentation strategies for large rockfill dams in complex geological settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207