DRDC Suffield Soil Laboratory Program. Progress Report - Piston and Onager Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AMEC Earth & Environmental Limited (AMEC) was retained by Defence Research & Development Canada (DRDC) Suffield to carry out laboratory testing on soil samples from prairie soil samples from the Mine Effects Site near Building 148 on the Experimental Proving Ground at DRDC Suffield. AMEC's geotechnical laboratory in Edmonton, Alberta received three large, bag soil samples in late October 2003 for DRDC's Piston, Onager East and Onager West sites. The following laboratory tests were requested by DRDC: 1. Determination of water content of soil samples; 2. Preparation of compacted samples in range of natural water contents; 3. Consolidation tests using ASTM D2435 on two samples; and 4. Triaxial undrained tests (CUP) using ASTM D4767 on three samples. A typical range of natural water contents of 13 to 19 percent was provided to AMEC by DRDC Suffield for similar soil at these sites. For testing, compacted samples were prepared at water contents within the natural water content range, with target water contents of approximately 15 percent. Results are provided according to American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM) standards where applicable. Results for the Triaxial undrained tests (CUP) using ASTM D4767 on three samples are provided in CR 2004-138, DRDC Soil Laboratory Program Triaxial Test Results - Onager Site.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.145 | 0.053 |
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".