MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321277832 · doi:10.1520/gtj20120218

Getting Information from Modal Decomposition of Grain Size Distribution Curves

2014· article· en· W2321277832 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringModalDistribution (mathematics)Grain sizeDecompositionParticle-size distributionGeologyMathematicsMaterials scienceMathematical analysisGeomorphologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Soil samples may be difficult-to-identify mixtures of different layers. For environmental and groundwater projects, a detailed stratigraphy is needed because the coarse layers are highways for both water and dissolved contaminants. The paper proposes a method to decompose a grain size distribution curve (GSDC) into its 1, 2, or 3 log-normal components and their proportions. The proposed method can accurately decompose synthetic mixes of three lognormal modes, except when a mode contributes for less than about 2 %. In such a case, it is suggested to ignore this mode and describe the mix as a two mode mix. An example is given for an experimental site with many split-spoon soil samples. The suspected stratification was confirmed by the decomposition method, which found mixtures of only two soil components, fine sand and clayey silt, each of them with little variability. The large-scale permeability, as provided by a pumping test, corresponds to the horizontally composed permeability of the soil components: thus, it confirms the adequacy of the soil sample decomposition method.

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.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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