MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2929550354 · doi:10.11159/icgre19.122

Using Intact Rock Brittleness for Assessing TBM Penetration

2019· article· en· W2929550354 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saffet Yağız, Aitolkyn Yazitova

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTunneling and Rock Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNazarbayev University
KeywordsBrittlenessPenetration (warfare)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper reviews the history of the punch penetration test (PPT) as a laboratory method that is conducted on intact sample to measure the rock brittleness (BI). Further, the interaction of rock brittleness and penetration rate of tunnel boring machine (TBM) has been examined and some relationship was developed between the BI and TBM penetration. For this aim, four tunnel projects having various rock types were studied and then four different dataset is examined and discussed herein. It is stated that the test via BI can be perfectly utilized for assessing the boreability of rocks. In conclusion, it is found that there is a relationship between the BI and TBMs penetration with correlation coefficient (r) ranging from 0.34-0.81 for hard rocks condition; however this correlation is quite low (0.34) for weathered and very weak sedimentary rocks categorized as extremely low brittle. The obtained results can be accepted for hard rocks but it should be used with care for weathered weak rocks that does not show brittleness behavior under the indentor.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicTunneling and Rock MechanicsFrench-language works237,207