MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809067124 · doi:10.1061/9780784481684.030

Experimental Study of Suction Stress Characteristic Framework for Granular Materials Using Conventional Direct Shear Test

2018· article· en· W2809067124 on OpenAlexaff
Emad Maleksaeedi, Mathieu Nuth, Sogol Sarlati

Bibliographic record

VenuePanAm Unsaturated Soils 2017 · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirect shear testMaterials scienceShear stressSuctionStress (linguistics)Structural engineeringShear (geology)Composite materialComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suction stress characteristic framework is considered as a practical approach to model the state of stress in granular and cohesive soils as a function of degree of saturation or water content. As an important part of effective stress in unsaturated soils, suction stress can be defined by the suction stress characteristic curve (SSCC). Although the SSCC can be directly determined from shear strength tests, studies suggest that it is intertwined with the soil water retention curve (SWRC). In this paper, the conventional direct shear tests along with water retention tests were used to determine the SSCC of fine sand mixture, over a range of suction controlled by water content. The suction stress approach was examined in conjunction with the semi-empirical procedure of predicting unsaturated shear strength by SWRC. The results indicated that conventional shear strength testing approaches along with SWRC models can be effectively used to assess the unsaturated shear strength and effective stress framework.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePanAm Unsaturated Soils 2017Same topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207