MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1876891555 · doi:10.7202/1000305ar

Gélifraction des roches humides : approche mathématique

2011· article· fr· W1876891555 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Horace Bertouille

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les contraintes que le gel développe dans une roche poreuse humide sont de deux espèces : 1) des contraintes d’origine thermique intrinsèquement en régime transitoire; 2) des contraintes dues au gonflement de l’eau humectant la roche lors de l’engel. Ce sont ces contraintes que nous étudions ici à partir d’un modèle mathématique simple : une sphère creuse à l’intérieur de laquelle se développe une pression pi. Lamé (1852) a donné l’équation des contraintes qui apparaissent en un point quelconque de la masse solide en fonction de pi. Par ailleurs, les théories de l’élasticité permettent de déterminer la pression Peq qui se développe dans la cavité au moment de l’engel. Connaissant cette pression, la répartition des contraintes qu’elle provoque dans la matière et la résistance de la roche, on peut déterminer s’il y a ou non fissuration ou éclatement de la roche sphérique. En étendant ce principe aux roches poreuses, il est possible de déterminer un taux critique de porosité au-dessus duquel le gel conduit à la rupture. Mais dans les roches, il faut tenir compte du fait que les canalicules du réseau de porosité débouchant à l’extérieur, il y a extrusion de la glace au moment de l’engel. D’autre part, les roches de la couche superficielle de l’écorce terrestre ayant subi de nombreux cycles de contraintes dues aux variations de température en particulier accusent une certaine fatigue qui diminue leur résistance mécanique.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéographie physique et Quaternaire→Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→