MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166437988

Slab Fracture at 1900 Frames Per Second-Experimental Methods

2008· article· en· W2166437988 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chris Borstad, D. M. McClung

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings Whistler 2008 International Snow Science Workshop September 21-27, 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlabMaterials scienceDeflection (physics)BendingUltimate tensile strengthFracture (geology)Fracture mechanicsStiffnessComposite materialStructural engineeringGeologyOpticsEngineeringPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present high speed video images of slab fracture experiments. Slab bending tests were conducted in a cold laboratory at Rogers Pass in Glacier National Park of Canada. A testing machine recorded the applied force and slab deflection in three- and four-point bending. Over the course of four days, the bending and resulting tensile fracture of 66 samples were captured by a high speed camera at rates of 1000 and 1900 frames per second. The purpose of capturing the tests on video was to observe the size of the fracture process zone and to calculate the speed of crack propagation. Slab samples were seeded with tracer particles for image analysis calculations, with the resulting pixel resolution in the sub-millimeter range. The samples were back-lit to illuminate the propagation of the crack. Dry slabs of differing density, hardness, crystal form and size, and temperature were sampled. Slabs of the same composition but different size were tested to investigate the size effect. The peak strength, stiffness, and shape of the loading curve were found to be very sensitive to the loading rate.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.009

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings Whistler 2008 International Snow Science Workshop September 21-27, 2008Same topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207