Influence of Structural Features and Fracture Processes on Surface Roughness: A Case Study from the Krosno Sandstones of the Górka–Mucharz Quarry (Little Beskids, Southern Poland)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paper presents the results of analysis of surface roughness parameters in the Krosno Sandstones of Mucharz, southern Poland. It was aimed at determining whether these parameters are influenced by structural features (mainly the laminar distribution of mineral components and directional distribution of non-isometric grains) and fracture processes. The tests applied in the analysis enabled us to determine and describe the primary statistical parameters used in the quantitative description of surface roughness, as well as specify the usefulness of contact profilometry as a method of visualizing spatial differentiation of fracture processes in rocks. These aims were achieved by selecting a model material (Krosno Sandstones from the Górka-Mucharz Quarry) and an appropriate research methodology. The schedule of laboratory analyses included: identification analyses connected with non-destructive ultrasonic tests, aimed at the preliminary determination of rock anisotropy, strength point load tests (cleaved surfaces were obtained due to destruction of rock samples), microscopic analysis (observation of thin sections in order to determine the mechanism of inducing fracture processes) and a test method of measuring surface roughness (two- and three-dimensional diagrams, topographic and contour maps, and statistical parameters of surface roughness). The highest values of roughness indicators were achieved for surfaces formed under the influence of intragranular fracture processes (cracks propagating directly through grains). This is related to the structural features of the Krosno Sandstones (distribution of lamination and bedding).
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 it