MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414179384 · doi:10.3390/app151810065

CPT-Based Shear Wave Velocity Correlation Model for Soft Soils with Graphical Assessment

2025· article· en· W4414179384 on OpenAlexaff
Huihao Chen, Zhongkai Huang, Qiang Huang, Qiang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWave velocityShear (geology)Shear velocityCone penetration testPenetration testPenetration (warfare)Shear stress

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shear wave velocity is a key parameter for evaluating the mechanical properties of soils, and direct measurement is technically demanding and costly. Realizing rapid prediction by establishing correlations between other parameters and shear wave velocity is an economical solution. Combined with the drilling data from 12 different areas of Shanghai’s soft ground layer, the regression models of shear wave velocity Vs and cone penetration resistance Ps versus burial depth H were established, and the new models were assessed by the existing regression models, graphical analyses, and statistical assessment methods. The results show that the existing regression models between shear wave velocity and cone penetration resistance cannot effectively predict the shear wave velocity of soft soil layers in Shanghai; the shear wave velocity of soft soil layers is closely related to cone penetration resistance and burial depth; and the newly established regression model can more accurately calculate the shear wave velocity of soft soil layers in Shanghai. This study provides an economical and effective solution for the rapid prediction and engineering application of shear wave velocity in soft soil layers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207