MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150415990 · doi:10.1139/t05-084

Formulation of a three dimensional analytical solution to evaluate stresses in backfilled vertical narrow openings

2005· article· en· W2150415990 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Li Li, Michel Aubertin, Tikou Belem

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringLateral earth pressureGeologyStress (linguistics)Overburden pressureWork (physics)EngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanical response of backfill in narrow openings is significantly influenced by its interaction with the surrounding walls. Previous work conducted on backfilled trenches and mining stopes indicates that the theory of arching can be used to estimate earth pressures in narrow, vertical backfilled openings. In this paper, a 3D analytical solution is proposed to evaluate the state of stress along the boundaries of the openings. The proposed solution, based on a generalized version of the Marston approach, is compared with numerical modeling and laboratory experimental results taken from the literature. A discussion follows on some particular features and limitations of the analytical solutions.Key words: backfill, earth pressure, 3D openings, analytical solutions, trenches, mining stopes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations120
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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