Interpreting pore-water pressure changes induced by water table fluctuations and mechanical loading due to soil moisture changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pore pressures within saturated subsurface formations respond to stress changes due to loading as well as to changes in pore pressure at the boundaries of the formation. The pore-pressure dynamics within a thick aquitard in response to water table fluctuations and mechanical loading due to soil moisture changes have been simulated using a coupled stress–strain and groundwater flow finite element formulation. This modelling approach isolates the component of pore-pressure response of soil moisture loading from that caused by water table fluctuations, by using a method of superposition. In this manner, the contributions to pore-pressure fluctuations that occur as a result of surface moisture loading (e.g., precipitation, evapotranspiration) can be isolated from the pore-pressure record. The required elastic stress–strain properties of the aquitard were obtained from the measured pore-pressure response to barometric pressure changes. Subsequently, the numerical simulations could be calibrated to the measured response by adjusting only the hydraulic conductivity. This paper highlights the significance of moisture loading effects in pore-pressure observations and describes an efficient technique for obtaining in situ stress–strain and hydraulic properties of near-surface aquitards.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".