MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766408358 · doi:10.3390/min7100201

Stress Ratios in Entire Mine Stopes with Cohesionless Backfill: A Numerical Study

2017· article· en· W2766408358 on OpenAlexafffund
Pengyu Yang, Li Li, Michel Aubertin

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsDegree RankineStress (linguistics)Geotechnical engineeringStress concentrationParametric statisticsLateral earth pressureOverburden pressureGeologyInstant centre of rotationMaterials scienceMechanicsGeometryRotation (mathematics)PhysicsMathematicsComposite materialThermodynamicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluation of stress states in backfilled mine stopes (or similar openings), using arching theory, can be largely impacted by the value selected for the earth pressure coefficient, K = σ′h/σ′v. Recently, the current study’s authors addressed the debate about the value of K near the opening center, based on Rankine’s active coefficient (Ka) and at-rest coefficient (K0). Here, stress ratios in vertical backfilled stopes are numerically assessed (in two dimension, 2D), considering both the independent and related backfill internal friction angle (ϕ′) and Poisson’s ratio (ν). Emphasis is placed on the backfill state near stope walls, where local rotation of stresses occurs, so the coefficient (K) and principal stress ratio, Kps (= σ′3/σ′1), should be distinguished. Parametric analyses indicate that values of K and Kps depend on the position and the relationship between ϕ′ and ν. Near the opening center, K (= Kps) is close to Ka when ν or ϕ′ is below a critical value; otherwise the value approaches K0, defined from ν. Near both walls, Kps is always close to Ka, while K is near K0 for related ν − ϕ′ cases and depends on their respective values for independent ν and ϕ′. Additional simulations conducted with interface elements indicate that the stress ratios near the opening center line are insensitive to interface roughness and are almost identical to values obtained without interfaces, but the stress ratios near walls may change for less rough or smooth interfaces.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207