IMPORTANCE OF SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY PROFIL ACCURACY IN DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The demand for a precise evaluation of shear wave velocity Vs, is gaining interest in the field of geotechnical engineering due to its importance as a key parameter required to properly evaluate typical characteristics of soils. Field tests of Vs measurements have been used more often due to the accessibility of new techniques, such as the SCPT test, and the availability of geophysical methods using surface waves (e.g., MASW and MMASW). However, the analysis of the obtained data is a very difficult task that requires specialized equipment and technical expertise to assure that the measured data are properly handled and interpreted. Also, a proper data treating are of outmost importance where a great precision in the calculation of the deposit response is required such as in liquefaction evaluation or earthquake ground response analyses. In these situations, it is recommended to verify the coherence between the obtained geophysical (Vs) and geotechnical (N-SPT, qc-CPT) measurements using alternative methods (e.g., Vs-correlations, H/V method, etc.). In some situations, there may be consensus between the measurements that makes it easier for the designer to set dependably the seismic wave profiles. In other cases, geophysical and geotechnical test would provide very different resolutions for Vs measurements, an issue that complicates the decision of the practitioner. In this paper, a case study of Vs profiles measurements using MASW, MMASW, and SCPT tests at the Sorel-Tracy site, Quebec have been detailed, analysed, and discussed. Vs-qc and Vs-N correlations as well as the H/V spectral method have been utilized to verify the measured Vs profiles to assist the designer engineer in reaching an appropriate decision.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".