Partially saturated tailings sand below the phreatic surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An opportunity to re–examine the liquefaction potential of hydraulically placed tailings sand has been provided by the Canadian Liquefaction Experiment (CANLEX). As part of this experiment, undisturbed samples of tailings sand were recovered after freezing the tailings in situ. Examination of undisturbed cores of frozen tailings sand clearly showed that the specimens were not fully saturated. This was confirmed by both physical measurements and laboratory tests in which gas was recovered from thawing specimens and analysed by gas chromatography. The gas was mainly air although a small amount of microbial gas was also present. Cryogenic scanning electron microscopy and confocal laser scanning microscopy were used to further confirm the existence of occluded gas bubbles. Triaxial undrained compression tests were carried out on undisturbed tailings specimens that were not back–saturated prior to shearing, in order to preserve the in–situ degree of saturation. Occluded air bubbles within the tailings sand, even if only in very small percentages by volume, are shown to have a marked effect on the response to undrained loading of the pore pressure within the tailings specimens. It is suggested that the liquefaction potential of tailings sand that could be expected to be contractive under undrained loading may be reduced by the occurrence of occluded gas bubbles within the voids. While it is not possible to quantify these effects accurately until further laboratory testing of both unsaturated and saturated loose tailings specimens has been conducted, this attribute could modify present engineering design. In this respect, obtaining undisturbed samples of granular soil is an important component of evaluating the liquefaction susceptibility of a specific deposit.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".