Large-scale geomechanical model testing of an underground cavern group in a true three-dimensional (3-D) stress state
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stability of a large cavern group at great depth is discussed on the basis of large-scale three-dimensional (3-D) geomechanical model tests and numerical simulations. The model tests are described in detail. Improvements in the tests were made in terms of experimental techniques and advanced measurement methods. The model tests utilized active loading on six sides of a rock mass in a true 3-D stress state. During the model construction, precast blocks were fabricated and monitoring holes were defined prior to test initiation. Newly developed combination ball-sliding walls were installed on each of the major loading surfaces to reduce the friction induced by model deformation. A unique grouting and installation technique employing prestressed cables was adopted in the tests. A digital photogrammetric technique, displacement sensing bars using fiber Bragg grating (FBG) technology, and mini multipoint extensometers were developed for measuring deformation. Overloading tests were then conducted for different overburden depths, and 3-D numerical analyses were performed to simulate the testing procedures. Conclusions regarding the stability of the cavern group were developed based on a comparison between the experimental and numerical results.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it