MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mechanical Properties of Sandstone under Loading and Unloading Conditions

2014· article· en· W2047099422 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeomechanics and Mining Engineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersChina Three Gorges University
KeywordsOverburden pressureBrittlenessGeotechnical engineeringDeformation (meteorology)ModulusResidual strengthMaterials scienceRock mass classificationCompression (physics)Compressive strengthElastic modulusTriaxial shear testGeologyComposite materialShear (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanical properties of rock mass under unloading conditions are essentially different from that under loading conditions. Triaxial compression tests and unloading confining pressure tests are conducted, and test results show that unloading failure is more brittle, and rock samples suffer more damage under unloading failure. The larger the initial confining pressure is, the easier of unloading failure is occurred. The increasing or decreasing values of rock deformation modulus under unloading conditions are within 10% of rock triaxial compressive strength. Unloading failure leads to deterioration of rock deformation modulus, which decreases gradually with confining pressure decreasing, and the decrease rates get bigger and bigger with unloading ratio of confining pressure increasing. Deformation modulus is only 24-34% of that under loading condition when rock strength goes down to residual strength.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.255 · 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