MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274320904 · doi:10.3929/ethz-a-010469200

Excavation damage zone cut-off dimension assessment using continuum mechanics

2015· article· en· W2274320904 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew A. Perras, Simon Loew, Mark S. Diederichs, Tom Lam, Mark Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsNuclear Waste Management OrganizationQueen's University
FundersNuclear Waste Management Organization
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)Damage mechanicsExcavationGeologyForensic engineeringEngineeringMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A critical component of a nuclear waste repository is the cut-off seal, which will mitigate flow and gas migration along the excavation surface and damage zone.This paper examines a thin to wide slot cut-off geometry under fixed stress (an upper bound) and sedimentary rock properties.Volumetric extensile strain was used as an indicator of the extent of excavation damage prior to and after the construction of the cut-off.Using the volumetric extensile strain to plastic yield zone area ratio the cut-off performance for thickness to depth ratios between 0.05 and 0.7 were examined.It was found that for a cut-off with a thickness to depth ratio of less than 0.13 a complete disconnect could be established across the cut-off slot, indicating that a slender slot is optimum under the conditions modelled.Further modelling with different stresses and properties will establish if these results are applicable for a wider range of possible repository settings.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)Same topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207