1 UNDRAINED BEHAVIOR OF LIQUEFIED SOIL By:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to analytically relate the post earthquake undrained stress-strainstrength behavior of liquefied sand to its initial (pre earthquake) state, thereby allowing the designer to predict the potential resistance of such liquefied sand to sustained or monotonically increasing (post earthquake) static loads. Currently, the only way to assess the mobilized undrained behavior of liquefied saturated sand (stress-strain and stress path) under monotonic loading is via laboratory testing (a black box approach). Such behavior has been assessed experimentally by several researchers interested in the varying resistance of saturated sand under undrained monotonic loading after being liquefied under cyclic loading corresponding to the free-field shaking of the earthquake (Fig. 1). Such post earthquake characterization is important relative to such problems as slope stability and post earthquake behavior of both shallow and deep foundations (footings and piles). The present work has been fashioned to deal with sands of different properties (gradation, density, particle shape, etc.) under different levels of confining pressure (representing varying overburden and depth below the groundwater table). The validity of the proposed work is to be verified by comparison with observed results of Nevada, Ione, Ottawa, Banding and Fraser
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".