MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168326513 · doi:10.1139/t01-003

A case history of shallow sloughing within cut slopes of an irrigation canal in salt-rich clayey colluvium

2001· article· en· W2168326513 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
R S Globa, S. Lee Barbour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySloughingColluviumGeotechnical engineeringCompactionSoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An investigation and remediation of instability along cut slopes of an irrigation canal in salt-rich clayey colluvium in southern Alberta is described. Random sloughing of the canal side slopes began to occur 2 years after construction over a 7500 m length of canal and was nearly continuous over a 2500 m length 3 years later. The sloughs are shallow seated and most had the appearance of a "mud" flow. Soil salinity also developed along the canal slopes due to capillarity and evaporation. Failure of the clay slopes in the cut sections is attributed to swelling, dispersion, and softening of the subgrade due to exposure of the salt-laden clays to fresh water. In contrast, 600 m of salt-rich clayey colluvium compacted as a clay liner on the canal side slopes showed no evidence of sloughing and salt loading after 9 years of service. Good soil compaction inhibited softening and slope instability in these salt-rich soils. Results from detailed site investigations and observations, and the interplay of soil chemistry and geology, facilitated the selection of a satisfactory method of repair. Repairs consisted of reconstructing 2500 m of canal by overexcavating the canal subgrade and replacing those soils with compacted soil.Key words: clays, salts, dispersive, sloughing, salinity, compaction.

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)0.001
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 score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207