Ground Freezing and Sampling of Pleistocene Sand near Charleston, South Carolina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The procedures used to freeze and sample a Pleistocene sand deposit near Charleston, South Carolina to preserve and study the effects of diagenesis are presented in this paper. Based on the results of geotechnical tests and a feasibility ground freezing study, a freezing system with a central freeze pipe was installed to target a column of clean sand 1 m in radius and 2.3 m in length. Liquid nitrogen was continuously supplied to the freeze pipe fabricated to freeze the sand between depths of 1.8 and 3.8 m below the ground surface for 270 h. Frozen sand cores taken from five locations 0.65 to 0.7 m away from the central freeze pipe indicate the ground was frozen between depths of 1.8 and 3.8 m at all but one location. Ground temperature measurements, growth of the frozen zone, and the amount of liquid nitrogen consumed are presented and compared with predicted values. Recorded temperatures indicate that the freezing was influenced by the direction of groundwater flow, the flow rate of liquid nitrogen, and the location of the liquid nitrogen inlet pipe within the central freeze pipe.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".