MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561671843 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0250

Experimental study on swelling behaviour and microstructure changes of natural stiff Teguline clays upon wetting

2016· article· en· W2561671843 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lingling Zeng, Yu‐Jun Cui, Nathalie Conil, Jad Zghondi, Gilles Armand, Jean Talandier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwellingWettingMicrostructureMacroporePorosimetryMaterials scienceComposite materialGeotechnical engineeringPorosityGeologyPorous mediumChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the microstructure change induced by swelling for natural stiff Teguline clays. The predominant clay mineral measured by X-ray diffractometry was identified to be illite and no swelling clay minerals were found. Significant swelling occurs upon wetting, illustrating the process of suction release from a nearly fully saturated condition. Mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) and scanning electron microscopy were used to identify the change in microstructure with swelling during wetting. It is found that the soil swelling mainly leads to an increase of macropores (0.15–350 μm), and a slight decrease of micropores (0.006–0.15 μm) and inaccessible pores (<0.006 μm and >350 μm). Furthermore, swelling was found to occur in the direction perpendicular to the bedding plane, indicating an anisotropic swelling behaviour. The creation and development of cracks during wetting were also investigated. It appears that most cracks caused by swelling have the size of macropores (0.15–350 μm) identified by the MIP test. These findings call enough attention to the significant change in microstructure by wetting-induced swelling that can strongly influence the thermohydromechanical properties of stiff clays.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations42
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207