MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334451404 · doi:10.1061/40971(310)66

Comparison of Geotextile and Geogrid Reinforcement on Unpaved Road

2008· article· en· W2334451404 on OpenAlexaff
Jingyu Zhang, Gary Hurta

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoCongress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotextileGeogridSubgradeGeosyntheticsGeotechnical engineeringReinforcementDrainageAggregate (composite)EngineeringMaterials scienceStructural engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geosynthetics, such as geotextile and geogrid, are commonly used for the reinforcement of unpaved roads. The geosynthetics can reduce the thickness of aggregate required above soft subgrade and improve the durability of the unpaved road. Both geotextile and geogrid perform similar functions and often equivalently. However, the similar functions come from different reinforcement mechanisms. The reinforcement by geogrid mainly results from lateral constraint provided by interlocking between aggregate and geogrid. In contrast, geotextile functions through a number of ways, including reinforcement through interaction friction, separation between subgrade soil and base course material, filtration, and drainage. Several methods are available to design unpaved road using these two reinforcements. The focus of this paper is to review and discuss the reinforcement mechanisms from geotextile and geogrid, as well as methods used for the design of unpaved roads with the two reinforcements.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoCongress 2008Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207