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
Abstract The filter paper method, ASTM Standard D5298-03 is generally accepted to be an inexpensive, technically simple, and reasonably accurate method that could be used to measure a wide range of soil suction. The method, however, is dependent upon the accuracy of the calibration curve that relates filter paper water content to soil suction. Additionally, applying a contact stress to the filter papers significantly influences this calibration curve. The effect of five separate contact stresses, namely, 0, 0.4, 1, 2, and 4 kPa on the calibration curve of Whatman 42 filter paper were examined. The study demonstrates that a contact stress of 1 kPa will ensure direct contact between the filter papers and the pore-water of the test specimens without significantly altering the ASTM calibration curve. The contact filter paper method was used to measure the matric suction of compacted Indian Head till specimens over a range of 20 to 300 kPa. This range was chosen to understand the performance and sensitivity of the filter paper method in the low suction range. A comparison of published calibration equations was then undertaken to show the drastically different matric suction estimates that can be obtained by the improper selection of published calibration equations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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