MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074706610 · doi:10.1520/gtj11052j

The Influence of Biofilm on the Mechanical Behavior of Sand

2000· article· en· W2074706610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
SW Perkins, Philip Gyr, Garth A. James

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOedometer testGeotechnical engineeringCreepViscoplasticityBiofilmDeformation (meteorology)StiffnessStress (linguistics)CompressibilityConstitutive equationMaterials scienceFinite element methodGeologyEngineeringComposite materialStructural engineeringSoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The growth of microbes on the surface of an object results in the formation of a biofilm, which in sand can lead to a reduction of hydraulic conductivity and can be used for groundwater containment and remediation. Sample preparation and testing techniques for triaxial and oedometer experiments were devised for the purpose of examining the influence of biofilm on the stress-strain-time properties of Ottawa sand. Results have shown that biofilm has a negligible influence on the strength and stiffness of the sand but increases time-dependent creep deformation. An elasto-viscoplastic constitutive model was calibrated for biofilm and non-biofilm sand and implemented into a finite-element code for the purpose of predicting creep deformation of a slope and a foundation resting on level ground. Numerical simulations showed that additional creep behavior of the biofilm sand had a negligible influence on the behavior of these geotechnical engineering facilities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations29
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical Testing JournalSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207