MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095573086 · doi:10.1139/s08-006

Formation of silica grout curtains and containments in mineralized groundwater

2008· article· en· W2095573086 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
M. Elektorowicz, R. Hesnawi, Tahar Ayadat, R. Chifrina

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGroutDistilled waterSodium silicateAquiferGroundwaterSilicatePermeability (electromagnetism)SodiumPortland cementBrineCuring (chemistry)ChlorideMineralogyGeologyCementChemistryEnvironmental chemistryGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialMetallurgyChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experimental investigation was conducted to evaluate the performance (as reflected by changes in permeability) of grouted soil specimens subjected to waters of various chemistry (mineralized groundwater) under a gradient of approximately 18. The specimens were composed of pure silica sand and clayey silty sand injected with one of two types of sodium silicate grout (sodium silicate + ethyl acetate-formamide, and sodium silicate + calcium chloride). The grouted specimens were tested in an environment that simulated different waters (distilled, freshwater, and saltwater). This work investigated the effects of curing time, environment, grout contents, and groundwater quality on the behaviour of silicate-grouted specimens, and analysed curtain formation mechanism. The test results showed that sodium silicate with ethyl acetate-formamide (SA) exhibited an increase in permeability when subjected to both freshwater and saltwater. Sodium silicate with calcium chloride (SC), however, maintained permeability properties when subjected to both freshwater and saltwater. The SC grouted specimens are less vulnerable to the action of groundwater than specimens grouted with SA. Furthermore, an empirical correlation relating the permeability of ungrouted and grouted specimens under different conditions was suggested. The correlation includes new defined parameters such as curing effect factor (α) and curtain vulnerability factor (κ).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207