MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051209313 · doi:10.1520/gtj102012

Reconstitution of Saturated Cement-Treated Soil by Wet-Mixing

2011· article· en· W2051209313 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory Lewsley, R. J. Fannin

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringCementSoil cementMixing (physics)GeologyMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new method is described for the reconstitution of cement-treated specimens of sand and silt for laboratory strength tests. Saturation of the slurry mix is attained through boiling the sand fraction at atmospheric pressure, boiling the silt fraction at a pressure that is reduced to a vacuum of 80 kPa, and mechanised blending of cement into the combined soil fractions in a rigid-walled former that is subjected to the same vacuum pressure. Reproducibility of the method is demonstrated from tests on four identical homogeneous specimens that yield a very narrow range in water content, bulk density, and unconfined compression strength. It is further evident in the trend of increasing strength with normalized cement content in those data.

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 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical Testing JournalSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207