Laboratory assessment of the effects of polymer treatment on geotechnical properties of low-plasticity soil slurry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A laboratory study was undertaken to assess the effects of polymer treatment (PT) on the geotechnical behaviour of a low-plasticity slurry. PT was undertaken on the material using a high molecular weight polyacrylamide polymer. Slurry consolidometer and triaxial testing were undertaken to compare the geotechnical behaviour of the material following PT, compared to an untreated (UT) condition. The material was prepared from a slurry state in a nonsegregating condition, to enable comparison of uniform samples. Testing indicated that PT resulted in lower final consolidated densities at a given magnitude of effective stress, while increasing the rate of consolidation and hydraulic conductivity. Triaxial testing indicated that PT material, when sheared, appeared to exhibit a different critical state line (CSL) than UT material. The PT CSL was higher in void ratio terms than the UT CSL, and with an increased compressibility. Both PT and UT material exhibited undrained shear strengths consistent with the state of the specimen with respect to that material’s CSL. PT material exhibited higher undrained shear strengths at a given density. All the effects observed following PT appeared to persist across a wide range of effective stresses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".