Cadia dam: a critical state view of residual soil behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical state theory evolved through various contributions relating to both sands and clays, but all were based on remoulded or reconstituted samples. This evolution has produced a perception that the theory applies only to ‘structureless’ soils, with the corollary of no relevance to natural soils which have developed structure and/or bonds through geological processes; residual soils are a particular example. A structured residual soil at the Cadia Northern Tailings Storage Facility displayed brittle undrained behaviour comparable to static liquefaction and contributed to a slump of the dam. The effect of structure is conventionally taken into account by expanding a soil’s yield surface but doing so leads to an increased elastic response whereas residual soils normally show plastic strains near immediately. Here we add ‘structure’ to the theory using two additional soil properties, one a true cohesion attributable to structure and the second characterising the rate of decay of that structure with distortion. This extended theory replicates the measured behaviour of the residual soil considered. The extended theory can be used with existing geotechnical modelling software to simulate progressive failure provided that the software includes user-defined routines (‘scripts’) to allow updating of the critical friction ratio as analysis proceeds.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".