MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978871379 · doi:10.1680/geolett.14.00051

On the distinct phenomena of suffusion and suffosion

2014· article· en· W1978871379 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGéotechnique Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsInstabilityHydraulic conductivityMechanicsConductivityGeotechnical engineeringGeologySoil waterChemistrySoil sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seepage-induced internal instability is a phenomenon whereby fine particles are transported from a non-plastic soil. A distinction can readily be made between a washed-out soil structure that remains intact and one in which some form of destruction or collapse of the structure accompanies the migration of fine particles. The three variables of a measured value of mass loss, a measured value of volume change and a value of change in hydraulic conductivity, deduced from measurements of hydraulic gradient and flow rate, are sufficient to quantify, and hence distinguish between, seepage-induced internal instability phenomena. The term ‘suffusion’ is advocated to describe the non-destructive response, which may be quantified by a mass loss, no change in volume and an increase in hydraulic conductivity. The term ‘suffosion’ is recommended to describe the instability phenomenon whereby the transport of fine particles by seepage flow is accompanied by a collapse of the soil structure. Accordingly, this distinct internal instability phenomenon may be quantified by a mass loss, a volumetric contraction and a change in hydraulic conductivity.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.156
Teacher spread0.152 · 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