Modelling the efficiency of a drainage gallery work for a large landslide with respect to hydrogeological heterogeneity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes transient hydrogeological and geomechanical models realized jointly in 2006 by the Geolep office (Géologie de l’Ecole Polytechnique) of the Polytechnical School of Lausanne (EPFL) and GeoMod SA within the framework of the stabilization work of the La Frasse landslide (Vaud, Switzerland). These models evaluate the impact of a deep drainage gallery with subvertical drainage boreholes towards the surface in terms of reduction of the deformation velocities and increase of the landslide’s factor of safety. The paper presents the effect of different pipe spacing of the drainage system. Considering the local heterogeneities, the results show that a mean spacing between the drainage boreholes of the order of 10 m is sufficient to control the temporal head fluctuations between the wells within a range of a few metres. Moreover, this solution induces a strong diminution of the predicted displacements during a specific crisis, from 101 cm for the model without drainage to around 14 cm for the drained model, and a significant gain of stability (from a factor of safety (FoS) of 1.05 to 1.30).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".