Estimating compaction behavior of fine-grained soils based on compaction energy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For successful designs of geotechnical structures, rational determination of the engineering properties of soils is an important process. In this context, compaction parameters, maximum dry unit weight (γ dmax ), and optimum water content (w opt ) are required to be determined at various compaction energies. This paper proposes correlation equations that relate γ dmax and w opt obtained from standard Proctor (SP) and modified Proctor (MP) tests to the index properties. To develop accurate relations, the data collected from the literature and the authors’ own database have been used. It has been found that while w opt has the best correlation with plastic limit (w p ), γ dmax can be estimated more accurately from w opt than it can from w p . In addition, the empirical methods including compaction energy (E) are described for estimating w opt and γ dmax of fine-grained soils. The variables of the developed models for w opt and γ dmax are w p , E, and w opt. It has been shown that the proposed correlations including the compaction energy will be useful for a preliminary design of a project where there is a financial constraint and limited time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 it