The impact of hydraulic gradients and boundary conditions on the microstructural stability of clayey backfills with special respect to the risk of piping and erosion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disposal of hazardous waste like high-level radioactive waste (HLW) is made by confining it in canisters surrounded by dense, ductile “buffer” clay for placement in deposition holes at a few hundred meters depth in crystalline rock. The concept favoured by authorities in Sweden, Finland and Canada implies that the holes are bored from blasted or bored tunnels to be tightly backfilled by stacking compacted blocks of clay in the center and filling the remaining space between the blocks and the rock with blown-in clay pellets. The problem with this is that water flowing in from the rock can cause piping and erosion of the pellet filling, which can turn it into mud and disturb the placement of canisters and buffer clay. The controlling parameter is the rate of inflow of water per inflow point, which is determined by the structure and hydraulic conductivity of the rock. The paper describes a simple model of the mechanisms in penetration of water into the pellet fill and provides a basis for estimating the required rate of backfilling for avoiding critical conditions. The study indicates that such conditions will be caused irrespective of the rate of water inflow per point if the backfilling rate is low.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".