MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170080241 · doi:10.1139/t11-060

A laboratory investigation of the dynamic properties of tailings

2011· article· en· W2170080241 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Michael B. James, Michel Aubertin, Dharma Wijewickreme, G. Ward Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Natural ResourcesUniversity of British ColumbiaPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTailingsGeotechnical engineeringConsolidation (business)SiltLiquefactionGeologySlurryEffective stressShear modulusMaterials scienceComposite materialMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic response of tailings from a gold mine located in western Quebec was evaluated using cyclic laboratory testing. These tailings are classified as nonplastic silt and sand. Specimens of the tailings were prepared as slurries, consolidated to vertical effective stresses of 100–400 kPa, and subjected to cyclic direct simple shear testing with cyclic stress ratio, CSR, values between 0.075 and 0.15. The shear modulus reduction of the tailings under cyclic loading was found to be fairly similar to that described for clean sands in the literature. The cyclic resistance ratio, CRR (which reflects the liquefaction resistance), of the samples was not significantly affected by the effective consolidation stress (in the range considered here). Analysis of test results with the simplified method of liquefaction evaluation indicates that this method may be applicable to these tailings. However, other factors, such as the possible effects of layering and ageing of the tailings in situ, should also be considered in such an assessment.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.156
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 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

Citations91
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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