Investigation of the swelling behaviour of compacted bentonite–sand mixture by mock-up tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two small-scale mock-up tests were carried out on a compacted mixture of bentonite and sand, one with saturation from the bottom only and the other with saturation from the top and bottom. Swelling pressure was monitored at different positions of the soil sample in both axial and radial directions. Results showed that the two-side saturation accelerates the swelling pressure kinetics by a factor of 4. The radial swelling pressure kinetics depends on the soil swelling, soil collapse, and interaction between the soil layers. Further analysis based on the relative humidity measurements in an infiltration test performed previously showed that the variations of swelling pressure with suction are similar to those found in literature, and that threshold points exist indicating the initiation of soil collapse. These threshold points appeared at higher suction when the soil was farther from the wetting face. The failure of the axial confining elements in the storage galleries was also simulated by releasing the piston and allowing a limited axial swelling of 20%. The radial swelling pressures decreased sharply upon the piston release and during the free axial swelling. A swelling pressure gradient was found from the bottom to the top with a higher value at the bottom. The density gradient was estimated based on the swelling pressure profile.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".