MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588970754

Analysis and Interpretation of In Situ Rock Bolt Pull Tests in Hard Rock Mines

2016· dissertation· en· W2588970754 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyInterpretation (philosophy)Geotechnical engineeringMining engineeringIn situForensic engineeringRock mechanicsEngineeringComputer scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rock bolts are the principal reinforcement element of many underground support systems. This thesis investigates and characterizes the behaviour and performance of rock bolts as measured by a pull test. A database composed of 985 pull tests from six mines in the Sudbury Basin was assembled. Procedures and apparatuses used to conduct these tests were compared to ASTM's standards and ISRM's suggested methods. The results from the pull tests were used to compare the behaviour of reinforcement elements with theoretical models and to quantify performance metrics and their distributions. The influence of bolt, installation and rock mass parameters on the performance of certain rock bolts was investigated, and distributions of expected behaviour were constructed. These may be used in the design of hard rock underground excavations using methodologies that incorporate both the load capacity and displacement behaviour of rock bolts.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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