MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018604855 · doi:10.1080/17486025.2012.714476

A three-dimensional equivalent continuum constitutive model for jointed rock masses containing up to three random joint sets

2012· article· en· W2018604855 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Agharazi, C. Derek Martin, Dwayne D. Tannant

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomechanics and Geoengineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutive equationJoint (building)Mohr–Coulomb theoryAnisotropyRock mass classificationDeformation (meteorology)Basis (linear algebra)Geotechnical engineeringGeometryGeologyPhysicsStructural engineeringMathematicsFinite element methodEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three dimensional constitutive model is formulated for deformation analysis of jointed rock masses containing up to three joint sets with arbitrary spatial configurations. A representative elementary volume (REV) that represents the deformational response of the rock mass is defined and the constitutive relationships are developed based on superposition of deformations of the REV components. By representing the constitutive relationships in a tensorial form, the model is able to implement deformation anisotropy of jointed rock masses. The Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion with tension cut-off is used for the intact rock and the joint sets. The model is implemented in FLAC3D and the deformations and strength values calculated by the model are compared with the results from a 3DEC model and analytical solutions. The model results are in good agreement with those obtained from 3DEC.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeomechanics and GeoengineeringSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207