Comparing Measured Hydraulic Conductivities of a Geotextile Polymer Coated GCL Utilizing Three Different Permeameter Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to measure hydraulic conductivities of a geotextile polymer coated GCL, permeated with water, with three different permeameters: constant-flow, fixed-wall single-ring (FWSR); flexible-wall (FW), and constant head, fixed wall double-ring (FWDR). All results, except for the samples tested with the FWSR were lower than 1.0 x 10–11 m/s, with some scatter in the test results at the relatively low bulk GCL void ratios tested. The results for sample diameters of 58 to 70 mm varied from 3.1 x 10–12 m/s to 9.2 x 10–12 m/s for samples tested at similar eB values using the FWSR and FW permeameters. Although only one test was performed with a 150 mm diameter sample using the FW permeameter method, this test was found to provide the lowest hydraulic conductivity of the GCL tested (1.9 x 10–12 m/s). This would seem to suggest the presence of some level of sidewall leakage during testing. However, diffusion testing and compatibility testing performed on this same GCL (not reported herein) suggests predominant flow through the GCL. Attempts to identify sidewall leakage using dyes were not successful.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".