MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606652621

Crack Damage Evaluation of Crystalline Rocks by Means of Acoustic Emission Technique

2014· article· en· W2606652621 on OpenAlexaff
Ehsan Ghazvinian, Diederichs, D. Labrie, Annalisa Bandini, Paolo Berry

Bibliographic record

VenueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcoustic emissionGeologyForensic engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crack damage progression in crystalline rocks is approximated in laboratory by means of rigorous strain measurement and/or monitoring of Acoustic Emission (AE) activity. When both means are used, they are treated independently for quantification of damage in the rock. This paper is investigating a new method to combine the AE and strain data in a unified function to calculate the balance of stored and released energy in the rock due to loading (strain energy) and micro-cracking respectively. This method introduces a new solution for measurement and quantification of crack damage in rock and also provides a tool to investigate the brittleness of different rock types. Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) testing of six different rock types with strain measurement and AE monitoring was performed for this study. The application of the new method to the data collected from the UCS tests indicates the difference between the behaviour of the various rock types in terms of sudden energy release at the onset of CI threshold and the difference in the storability of strain energy before and after CI and CD thresholds.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)Same topicGeotechnical and Geomechanical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207