MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2741095385

Numerical Modelling of Fold-Related Fractures

2015· article· en· W2741095385 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Isa Kolo, Rashid K. Abu Al‐Rub, Rita L. Sousa, Mohamed Sassi, Manhal Sirat

Bibliographic record

VenueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFold (higher-order function)Computer scienceGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fractures induced by folds are pivotal in hydrocarbon exploration, ground water transport and harnessing of geothermal energy. This is because of the need to predict and understand fracture propagation in reservoirs which have folded rock formations. Despite its prominence, there is a lack of reliable numerical models for simulating fractures resulting from rock folding. This is partially due to the difficulty involved in fracture modelling. As a contribution to fold-fracture modelling, this work applies a coupled plasticity-damage model to rock fracturing and anticlinal folds. Parametric studies on a single folded layer give insight into the fold formation and behaviour. The anisotropic continuum damage model which considers both tension and compression is formulated using the power damage evolution law. For ease in formulation, strain equivalence hypothesis is adopted whereby the strain is the same for both damaged and undamaged configurations. Lubliner plasticity yield criterion is adopted for plastic deformation. The model is coded in Abaqus user subroutine UMAT and is applicable to quasi-brittle materials. © 2015 by the Canadian Institute of Mining.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)Same topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207