MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043035469 · doi:10.1061/41095(365)275

Laboratory-Prepared Iron Oxide Coatings on Coarse-Grained Soils as Residual Soil Simulants

2010· article· en· W2043035469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joan M. Larrahondo, Susan E. Burns, W. Crawford Elliott

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoFlorida 2010 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeorgia Institute of Technology
KeywordsHematiteIron oxideMaterials scienceMagnetiteWeatheringSoil waterMineralogyChemical engineeringMetallurgyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron oxide coatings are present in soils as a result of chemical and physical weathering. However, unlike some fabric cements, e.g., calcium carbonate, iron oxide coatings occur through chemical, not physical, bonding between particles. The objectives of this research are to describe the laboratory preparation of chemically-bonded hematite coated sands which can be used for geotechnical studies, and to present index characterization results of these materials. Ottawa sands were coated with hematite via a heterogeneous suspension reaction under controlled pH and ionic strength. The presence of adsorbed hematite on the sand surface was demonstrated by XRD patterns and SEM images. Results show that hematite coatings on sands increase specific gravity, decrease hydraulic conductivity, decrease limiting void ratios, and provide the sands with a hydrophilic character, with no particle shape change. These results suggest that laboratory-prepared hematite coated sands are good simulants of the coarse fraction of oxisols, ultisols, and ferricretes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoFlorida 2010Same topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207