MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084574357 · doi:10.1680/envgeo.13.00089

Soil–environment interactions modelling for expansive soils

2014· article· en· W2084574357 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

VenueEnvironmental Geotechnics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpansive clayGeotechnical engineeringShrinkageSoil waterWater contentEnvironmental scienceExpansiveSuctionSoil scienceGeologyEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water content and matric suction changes in unsaturated expansive soils due to environmental variations contribute to the overall volume changes (shrinkage or swelling). The soil movements cause tilt in trees, highway surfaces, building foundations and pipelines and pose problems to the functionality of the infrastructure. In this paper, a modulus of elasticity-based method approach (MEBM) proposed by Adem and Vanapalli (2013a) is tested for modelling the soil–environment interactions for a test site with an expansive soil deposit that was modelled by Ito and Hu (2011) for 1 year. In the MEBM, the soil suction changes in the active zone and the associated modulus of elasticity were estimated and used as key parameters in a volume change constitutive relationship to model the soil–environment interactions over time. The MEBM approach reasonably models the water content and matric suction changes over time and the swelling–shrinkage movements. The study results are encouraging for extending the simple MEBM in practice for rational design purposes of both the sub- and superstructures constructed in or on expansive soils.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · 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