MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129904952 · doi:10.1139/t04-047

Compression and strength of dense sand at high pressures and elevated temperatures

2004· article· en· W2129904952 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
J. Graham, Marolo Alfaro, Gerald R. Ferris

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)University of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringOverburden pressureTriaxial shear testCompression (physics)Shear (geology)Materials scienceStiffnessShear strength (soil)IsotropyQuartzGeologyComposite materialSoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper examines the stress–strain behaviour of densely compacted sand tested at pressures up to 80 MPa in one-dimensional compression and 7.2 MPa confining pressure in triaxial tests. Tests were performed at temperatures up to 100 °C. The testing relates to a proposal by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to fill containers of waste nuclear fuel with a crushed quartz sand to provide additional stiffness. No significant effects of temperature were encountered in either isotropic compression or triaxial shear.Key words: sand, compression, shear strength, temperature, pressure.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations40
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207