MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W241939939 · doi:10.21236/ada391164

Unsaturated Soil Hydraulic Parameter Studies

2000· report· en· W241939939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Molly M. Gribb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different field and laboratory methods for determining the hydraulic properties of unsaturated soils were studied. Drying moisture retention curves were measured on undisturbed soil samples with a pressure plate apparatus, and wetting soil moisture retention curves were measured on repacked soil columns via a capillary rise experiment Saturated hydraulic conductivities were measured in-situ with a Guelph permeameter, and in the laboratory with falling head tests. Finally, an inverse modeling technique was used to analyze transient flow data from in-situ cone permeameter and laboratory multi-step outflow experiments to simultaneously obtain wetting and drying curves for both the moisture retention and the hydraulic conductivity functions. The retention curves obtained from analysis of the cone permeameter data were consistent with results of the multi-step outflow tests and bounded by the capillary and pressure plate test results, as expected. The retention curves derived from cone permeameter data exhibited more curvature than those obtained from the other methods. The curves obtained from multi-step outflow tests exhibited less hysteresis than those derived from cone permeameter tests and were more repeatable than the pressure plate test results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207