MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998215928 · doi:10.1139/t06-116

Measuring the onset of mine tailings erosion

2007· article· en· W1998215928 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
M Haneef-Mian, Ernest K. Yanful, Robert J. Martinuzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Army Corps of EngineersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTailingsShear stressCritical resolved shear stressGeotechnical engineeringFlumeErosionShear (geology)GeologyPower lawShear rateMaterials scienceMechanicsRheologyMetallurgyGeomorphologyFlow (mathematics)Composite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study gives details of a methodology for estimating the critical shear stress for erosion of mine tailings and other naturally occurring cohesive sediments. Erosion of a cohesive sediments bed occurs when the critical shear stress is exceeded to break the interparticle bond. Experiments were conducted in a 30 cm diameter laboratory column and calibrated using laser Doppler anemometry. The results showed that the erosion pattern of mine tailings particles was similar to those of fine-grained cohesive sediments. A power-law relation of the form E = α[(τ – τcr)/τcr]nis suggested for mine tailings, where E is the erosion rate, α is a coefficient, τ is the shear stress, τcris the critical shear stress, and n is an exponent. The computed values of α, n, and τcrin the power-law equation were found to be comparable to values derived from experiments in a rotating circular flume. The derived expression for rate of erosion may be incorporated in resuspension and transport models for fine mine tailings of a similar nature.Key words: mine tailings, laser Doppler velocimetry, wall shear stresses, critical shear stress for erosion, erosion – shear stress relationship.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207