Field-monitored variations of soil moisture and matric suction in a saprolite slope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A full-scale field experiment has been conducted in an instrumented saprolite slope in Hong Kong. Soil moisture probes, tensiometers, piezometers, inclinometers, earth pressure cells, and a rain gauge were installed in the slope before and during excavation of a cut. This paper presents the results from soil moisture probes, tensiometers, and piezometers to reveal the surface infiltration process. The soil moisture and matric suction results show that the maximum "wetting front" during the wet season was limited to the top 3 m of soil, and a transient perched water table could develop in the soil during a very heavy rainstorm. A new method based on the variation of volumetric water content in the soil is proposed to analyze rainfall infiltration. The results indicate the following phenomena: (i) rainfall infiltration was around 70% of the total rainfall, (ii) the infiltrated water mainly increased the soil moisture content of the soil at shallow depths, and (iii) the surface vertical infiltration had a very limited effect on the permanent groundwater table at depth. The wetting-front analysis shows that the unsaturated wetting band theory can be used to assess the movement of the wetting front in the unsaturated saprolite soil.Key words: rainfall infiltration, moisture content, matric suction, wetting front, field instrumentation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".