MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947755587 · doi:10.15273/ijge.2019.01.001

Exploration of Measurement Methods of 3D In-Situ Stresses in Rock Masses

2019· article· en· W2947755587 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lin Cui, Dexuan Zou, Haoran Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Georesources and Environment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeomechanics and Mining Engineering
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoreholeGeologyRock mass classificationBreakoutGeotechnical engineeringStress (linguistics)Hydraulic fracturing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper gives an overview of the measurement methods for the 3D in-situ stresses. Rock masses in the Earth’s crust are stressed in a natural stress state, which has six components in three dimensions. They are called “in-situ stresses” or “field stresses” with three principal stress components. Reliable estimate of the in-situ stresses in the rock mass is essential and vital for proper planning and design, underground excavation, mineral resource exploitation and ground stability control in geotechnical, mining and petroleum engineering. The basic principles of the measurement methods, including overcoring, hydraulic fracturing, back analysis, borehole slotting, flat jack, geophysical, and borehole breakout, are introduced. The advantages and limitations are discussed and compared. Methods that measure borehole deformation and strains during overcoring appear most common and are the only methods for the complete 3D stresses. Other measurement methods generally provide results of the orientations and/or magnitudes of some components of the in-situ stresses, mostly the maximum and the minimum stresses in the plane perpendicular to the borehole. In some methods the vertical stress is assumed as a principal stress.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Georesources and EnvironmentSame topicGeomechanics and Mining EngineeringFrench-language works237,207