The role of particle type on suffusion and suffosion
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
A distinction can usefully be made between suffusion, which describes the removal of fine particles by seepage flow from a body of soil without volume change, and suffosion, which is characterised by the removal of fine particles, accompanied by contractive volume change. Four pairs of gap-graded specimens were prepared, each pair comprising one glass bead specimen and one soil specimen with sub-angular particles, with nominally identical particle size distributions. The reconstituted specimens were isotropically consolidated to the same confining stress, and then subject to multi-stage upward seepage flow in a flexible wall permeameter. The glass beads and soil specimens with a finer fraction content of 0·20 exhibited suffusion. It appears that the susceptibility to suffusion of these specimens was not governed by particle type. Suffosion was evident in glass bead specimens with a finer fraction content of 0·35, but it was not triggered at an equal, or even larger, hydraulic gradient in soil specimens with nearly identical gradations. Particle type thus appears to be a factor governing the susceptibility to suffosion and should be considered when investigating this phenomenon.
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