MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079010156 · doi:10.1520/gtj11431

A Physical Model for Sloping Capillary Barriers

2004· article· en· W2079010156 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapillary actionReflectometryCapillary pressureGeotechnical engineeringInstrumentation (computer programming)Pore water pressureMaterials scienceSoil waterEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceGeologyTime domainPorosityPorous mediumComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A physical capillary barrier model has been developed to study the mechanism and the effectiveness of a capillary barrier for slope stabilization purposes. A sloping two-layer capillary barrier model consisting of a relatively fine soil layer over a relatively coarse soil layer was constructed inside a specially designed apparatus. Simulated rainfalls of different intensities and durations representative of tropical climatic conditions were applied through a rainfall simulator. Various instruments consisting of tensiometers for pore-water pressure measurement, time domain reflectometry (TDR) for water content measurement, magnetic flow meter and electronic weight balances for water balance measurements were used in the experiment. The results obtained from various types of instrumentation were in good agreement. The experimental results show that the performance of the capillary barrier under the influence of a high precipitation rate is primarily governed by the storage capacity of the relatively fine soil of the capillary barrier.

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.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.217 · 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