MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975013663 · doi:10.1520/gtj20130154

Water-Retention Curves of Coarse Soils Without Organic Matter: Improved Data for Improved Predictions

2015· article· en· W1975013663 on OpenAlexaff
Robert P. Chapuis, Isabelle Masse, Bénédicte Madinier, François Duhaime

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil waterPermeability (electromagnetism)ResidualWater retentionVoid ratioGeotechnical engineeringSoil scienceWater retention curveDrainageEnvironmental scienceMathematicsGeologyAlgorithmChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is difficult to obtain a reliable water-retention curve (WRC) for coarse-grained soils without organic matter. As a result, the field behavior of draining layers in engineering problems may be poorly predicted. The main goal of this paper is to develop predictive methods for the WRC of coarse-grained soils based on long-column, long-duration drainage test data and available soil properties. The paper first shows that predictive models perform poorly for coarse-grained soils, but four descriptive models can correctly fit the test data. Second, it provides predictive equations for the air-entry value (AEV), residual suction ur, and residual water content θr as simple functions of the effective size d10 and void ratio e. Third, it provides new formulas that relate d10 and e to the parameters of descriptive models; thus, enabling them to become very simple to use predictive models for ed10 > 0.05 mm. The paper finally shows that small variations in d10 and e have more influence on the saturated permeability than on the WRC parameters.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical Testing JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207