MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074703514 · doi:10.1139/t07-117

Equations for the entire soil-water characteristic curve of a volume change soil

2008· article· en· W2074703514 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hung Q. Pham, D. G. Fredlund

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringSuctionGravimetric analysisSoil scienceWater retention curveSoil waterVolume (thermodynamics)Curve fittingResidualEnvironmental scienceMathematicsGeologyThermodynamicsChemistryStatisticsWater retentionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous curve-fitting equations have been proposed for soil-water characteristic curves. While these equations have been of considerable value in geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, the equations are not able to adequately fit gravimetric soil-water characteristic curve data over the entire range of soil suction for a soil that changes volume when suction is changed. Two new equations for the soil-water characteristic curve are presented in this paper. One equation has curve-fitting parameters that bear a meaningful relationship to conventional physical soil properties (e.g., air-entry value and residual soil suction), but the equation is somewhat complex. The equation is particularly useful for sensitivity type studies when undertaking computer modeling. The other equation is relatively simple to use and is developed as a conventional curve-fitting equation. The two equations are used to best-fit several soil datasets. Both equations perform well and can be used in research and engineering practice to define the gravimetric water content versus soil suction relationship for a soil exhibiting volume change.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations83
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207