MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W627101844

Monitoring Foundation Soil Vital Signs

2007· article· en· W627101844 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mathew Fielding

Bibliographic record

VenueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclinometerPiezometerSettlement (finance)Geotechnical engineeringInstrumentation (computer programming)Foundation (evidence)LeveeEngineeringPore water pressureCivil engineeringGeologyForensic engineeringGroundwaterComputer scienceGeographyAquiferArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geotechnical instrumentation allows engineers to track the vital signs of the underlying soils, helping optimize construction project schedules while managing risks associated with settlement and stability. This article provides an overview of some of the tools that are used in geotechnical instrumentation. Inclinometers measure horizontal movement of soil, and can show not only how much movement is occurring, but also the depth at which the movement is occurring. This allows engineers to carefully monitor soft layers. Settlement cells measure the settlement of soil supporting an embankment. Piezometers measure the pore pressure within the soil. Both piezometers and settlement cells can be used to double check expected settlement, which is often critical to construction schedules. The article highlights two recent bridge projects where inclinometers, settlement cells and piezometers were used to save time. Both projects involved the construction of bridges over soft, interbedded silts and clays, and both benefited from geotechnical instrumentation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBridges Conversations in Global Politics and Public PolicySame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207