Field experimental cells to evaluate the hydrogeological behaviour of oxygen barriers made of silty materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An in situ study was initiated to evaluate the efficiency of silts as moisture-retaining material in covers with capillary barrier effects (CCBEs) that aim at controlling the production of acid mine drainage (AMD). This investigation included the construction of four experimental cells covered by different layered cover configurations. Each CCBE was instrumented to monitor its hydrogeological behaviour. The degree of saturation (S r ) in the moisture-retaining (silty) materials was usually maintained above 85%, while S r in the two sand layers placed above and below the silts was generally lower than 30%–50% (typical hydrogeological behaviour of efficient CCBEs). Suction measurements in the different layers of the four CCBEs were consistent with the observed S r measurements during the four years of monitoring. The suctions measured in the moisture-retaining materials were lower than their respective air-entry values (AEV), while suctions largely exceeded the AEV of the sand in the capillary break layers. The oxygen flux calculations confirm that in each of the four CCBEs the flux through the CCBEs remained low for the entire duration of the experiment, hence limiting the generation of AMD. This study also confirmed the ability of silty materials to act as moisture retaining in a CCBE. Key words: cover with capillary barrier effects, acid mine drainage, experimental cells, in situ monitoring, unsaturated flow, diffusion, oxygen flux.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".