MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162473264 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2014-0316

Interpretation of the loading–wetting behaviour of compacted soils within the “MPK” framework. Part I: Static compaction

2015· article· en· W2162473264 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tanvirul Islam, Jayantha Kodikara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringCompactionSoil waterVoid ratioWater contentDegree of saturationWettingMoisturePore water pressureSuctionSwellingWater retentionMaterials scienceSaturation (graph theory)Effective stressWater retention curveEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceGeologyComposite materialField capacityEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depending on the state paths, loading–wetting of compacted unsaturated soils can exhibit complex volumetric behaviour, such as swelling, collapse, collapse followed by swelling, swelling followed by collapse, and swelling pressure development. Microscopically, these behaviours arise from complex interactions among applied stresses, air–water pressure deficit or suction at the water menisci, moisture content or degree of saturation in the voids, and the nature of the micro- and macrosoil aggregates of compacted soils that depend on the level of suction. While significant advances have been made in modelling hydromechanical behaviour of compacted unsaturated soils taking these interactions into account, input parameter determination requires advanced testing equipment and the testing processes can be very time-consuming. In 2012, a relatively simple and practical framework within the void ratio – moisture ratio (water volume / solid volume) – net stress space (referred to as the MPK framework) has been proposed by Kodikara to explain–predict these state paths. A desirable feature of this framework is that it identifies a direct link between the well-known compaction curve and the compacted soil constitutive behaviour. This paper presents a comprehensive series of tests on statically compacted soils, the results of which are in close agreement with this framework. Two soil types, namely lightly reactive kaolin and more reactive clay (referred to as Merri Creek soil), were used in the testing. The soils were prepared with different moisture contents from the dry state and statically compacted at constant water content to obtain void ratio – moisture ratio – net stress constitutive surfaces, as well as soil specimens for state path tests. The state path test results of yielding under loading, collapse under wetting, swelling pressure development, and change in yield pressure due to wetting are explained within this framework. In addition, some published data on a silty soil mixture were also analysed, highlighting that the framework is valid, regardless of the degree of reactivity of the soil. Suction was not measured in the authors’ experiments, as it was not required to explain the above state paths according to this framework. However, it is recognised that suction is the conjugate state variable to the moisture content. Therefore, in future experiments, suction will be measured and its role will be fully explained within the framework, adding more generality.

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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207