MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560477648 · doi:10.1680/jgere.16.00008

Determining silt state from CPTu

2016· article· en· W2560477648 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn Shuttle, M. G. Jefferies

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiltTailingsGeotechnical engineeringSlurryGeologyEnvironmental scienceMining engineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental engineeringGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tailings, produced when rock is crushed to recover metals, are normally discharged as slurry of predominantly silt-sized particles into storage areas that are created using dams. These dams have a poor safety record with billions of dollars in damages over the past decade alone, making reliable engineering of silt an important economic and safety issue for the mining industry. Equally, engineering of silts is challenging, as understanding of soil behaviour relates mostly to ‘sands’ or ‘clays’. Undisturbed silt samples suffer substantial densification between sampling, transfer to element test and reinstatement of in situ stresses. Hence, silts require a sand-like approach that combines laboratory tests on reconstituted samples with in situ cone penetration test (CPT) soundings. This paper presents calibrated spherical cavity expansion in a general critical-state soil model to simulate the CPT in silt. The developed methodology is numerical, accurately captures calibration data and allows determination of the in situ state parameter in silts from CPT data. A validation is presented for a large tailing impoundment using stacked thickened tailings. Open-source software implementing the methodology is provided on the journal website as supplementary material.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations68
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical ResearchSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207