Experimental Study on the Anisotropy of the Tensile and Shearing Strength of Coal Rock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tensile and shearing strength of coal rock accurately obtained by test can provide important parameters for the design of coal seam fracturing and mine support system. Due to coal bedding and cleat developed, the experimental results will exist voluminous discreteness and can’t accurate determine the tensile and shearing strength, ignoring the influence of loading direction and bedding and cleat development direction, In this paper, the tensile and shearing strength is measured by laboratory experiment, counting and analyzing divergence of different direction according to experimental results, obtaining the relationship between the tensile and shearing strength and the bedding and cleat development direction. This research confirms that the tensile and shearing strength of coal rock exists the characteristic of anisotropy and it should not only take the average value of the test results of different direction simply in engineering application. On the other hand, it can supply experimental consideration and method to confirm the tensile and shearing strength required by the relevant construction design. Key words: Coal rock; Tensile strength; Shearing strength; Anisotropy
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".