MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7149511273 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19412299

Risk Assessment of Geotechnical Slope Instability

2020· article· W7149511273 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Astrid Jørgensen, Lucas T. Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRockfallRockslideLandslideFragilityHazardVulnerability (computing)Risk assessmentHazard analysisNatural hazard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ottawa's Transitway has been the core infrastructure of an efficient and great BRT system of Canada, exclusive roads with steep rock slopes along more than 3,2 km which are most of the time exposed, showing pieces of evidence that the risk for the users may have been increasing. In fact, the low number of geological events and its neglected consequences related to the rock slopes until now have created a perception of a low-risk area for all the local society. The main objective of this work is the assessment of the risk inherent to the conditions posed by these rock slopes using the geotechnical engineering point of view. The limestone of the Transitway is deteriorating and this is a notable aspect for the geotechnical considerations. A practical method for rockfall, the RHRS – Rockfall Hazard Rating System was chosen. The results show hazards rating far from negligible. And because Ottawa is inside a very active earthquake zone, the hazards of earthquake related to a more important failure, the planar one, is studied. The pseudo-static approach performed showed that a failure is not impossible at all. Once the hazard of rockfall and rockslide are relevant, the vulnerability of the elements subjected to an eventual landslide and its amounts are presented. An evaluation of the risk is conducted, showing the minimum reasonable direct consequences for some scenarios that may be caused by rockfall and a rockslide. As conclusions, the risk assessment confirmed its relevance, earthquakes may cause landslides even though geological conditions are not the worst and the hazards are not the greatest. Factor of Safety has to be precisely updated to validate the risk status of the area. RÉSUMÉ Le Transitway d'Ottawa a été la principale infrastructure d'un système BRT efficace et extraordinaire du Canada, routes exclusives avec des pentes rocailleuses abruptes sur plus de 3,2km qui sont le plus souvent exposés, montrant des preuves que le risque pour les usagers a augmenté. En fait, la faible occurrence d'événements géologiques et ses conséquences négligées liées aux pentes de roches ont créé jusqu'à présent la perception d'une zone à faible risque. L'objectif principal de ce travail est l'évaluation du risque dû aux conditions imposées par ces pentes de roches en utilisant le point de vue de l'ingénierie géotechnique. Le calcaire du Transitway se détériore et il s'agit d'un aspect remarquable pour les considérations géotechniques. Une méthode pratique pour la chute des pierres, le RHRS – Rockfall Hazard Rating System, a été choisie pour la présente étude. Les résultats montrent que les dangers sont loin d'être négligeables. Étant donné qu'Ottawa se situe dans une zone sismique très active, les dangers liés à un effondrement plus important, le planar, sont étudiés. L'approche pseudostatistique réalisée a démontré que l'effondrement n'est pas du tout impossible. Une fois que le danger de chute de pierre et de glissement de pierre devient important, la vulnérabilité des éléments assujettis à un ultime glissement de terrain et de ses composés est présentée. Une évaluation du risque est menée, démontrant les conséquences minimales raisonnables directes pour quelques scénarios qui peuvent être causés par la chute de pierres ou par le glissement de pierres. En guise de conclusion, l'évaluation de risque confirme sa pertinence, les tremblements de terre peuvent causer des glissements de terrain même si les conditions ne sont pas les pires et les dangers ne sont pas les plus grands. Le facteur de sécurité doit être précisément mis à jour pour valider le statut de risque de l'aire.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.249
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→