Risk assessment of gas outburst in tunnels in non-coal formation based on the attribute mathematical theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gas outburst can result in great loss of life and property during tunnel construction. Gas outburst in tunnels in non-coal formation is often more harmful than that in coal-bearing formation. In order to take effective countermeasures to prevent the occurrence of gas outburst during tunnel construction, it is essential to assess the risk of gas outburst before tunnel construction. This paper attempts to establish an assessment system for evaluating the risk of gas outburst in tunnels in non-coal formation in the survey phase of tunnelling based on the attribute mathematical theory. Based on the principle of relevance and operability, eight factors that influence the gas outburst in non-coal formation are selected as the attribute evaluation indices. Attribute measure functions are constructed to calculate the single index attribute measures for evaluation indices. The fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process is used to determine weights of evaluation indices. A confidence criterion is applied to recognize the risk grade of the evaluation object. The proposed attribute evaluation system is applied to assess the gas outburst risk in a tunnel in the survey phase. The evaluation results show good agreement with the practical situation of gas, verifying the applicability of this attribute assessment system.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it