The Lachenaie clay deposit: some geochemical and geotechnical properties in relation to the salt-leaching process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes a detailed geotechnical and geochemical characterization program for the Champlain clay deposit in Lachenaie, Quebec. Presently, the clay pore water is saline. The main objective of the testing program was to study the leaching of the clay saline pore water since its deposition. Four issues are discussed in this paper. First, the deposit is shown to comprise two distinct clay layers with contrasting geotechnical properties. The liquid limit and grain-size distribution are the properties that best distinguish the two materials. The upper layer is more plastic while the lower one is relatively silty. The occurrence of these two layers is shown to be in agreement with some recent findings in Quaternary geology. Second, the relatively high pre-consolidation pressures of the clay in the Lachenaie area are shown to be coherent with an erosion scenario and the elevation of a neighbouring bluff previously interpreted as an erosion terrace. Third, the relatively constant hydraulic conductivity values obtained from permeability tests throughout the deposit are shown to be consistent with the variations of liquid limit and void ratio in the two clay sublayers. Fourth, the occurrence of sensitive clay pockets (sensitivity greater than 50) in this otherwise saline clay body is elucidated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".