MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064633525 · doi:10.1139/t09-136

The mechanics of subglacial sediment: an example of new “transitional” behaviour

2010· article· en· W2064633525 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fatin N. Altuhafi, Béatrice A. Baudet, Peter Sammonds

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringGeologyShearing (physics)Grading (engineering)Void ratioIsotropySoil mechanicsCritical state soil mechanicsSoil waterMineralogyMechanicsSoil scienceEngineeringStructural engineeringConstitutive equationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of isotropic compression tests and drained and undrained triaxial compression tests have been performed on glacial sediment from Iceland. Langjökull sediment, which is well graded, is thought to have reached a critical grading during deposition and transportation. Multiple parallel normal compression lines (NCLs) were found, but a unique critical state line (CSL) could be identified. This is unlike other so-called “transitional” soils, whose grading varies between reasonably well graded to gap graded, which tend to have distinct NCLs and critical state lines depending on the specimen density. It is thought that in the case of the Langjökull sediment studied, its particular strain history that involved incessant shearing during deposition accounts for the difference in behaviour. This provides the interesting case of a soil that has been crushed to a critical grading in situ, which depends on the mineralogy of the grains, which was then sampled and tested. Despite the unique grading, samples with a range of different void ratios can be prepared and the combination of grading and density seems to set a fabric that cannot be changed by compression, resulting in multiple parallel NCLs. At the critical state, however, the fabric has been destroyed and the CSL is unique.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations50
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207