MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948535233 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2018-0548

Investigation of particle breakage under one-dimensional compression of sand using X-ray microtomography

2019· article· en· W2948535233 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Budi Zhao, Jianfeng Wang, Edward Andò, Gioacchino Viggiani, M. R. Coop

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBreakageComminutionParticle (ecology)Materials scienceFractal dimensionParticle sizeGranular materialGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialCompressibilityMineralogyShear (geology)GeologyFractalMechanicsMetallurgyPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Particle breakage alters particle-scale properties of granular soils including particle size, shape, and contact conditions, and changes macroscale properties including soil compressibility, shear strength, and permeability. This study monitors the crushing of natural quartz sands under one-dimensional compression with in situ X-ray tomography, i.e., X-ray scans during loading. We use the assembly-scale and particle-scale images to characterize particle failure patterns, e.g., chipping, major splitting, and comminution. Image processing and analysis enable us to determine the failure patterns around the yield stress, and the influence of initial density and particle morphology on the particle survival probability. We further quantify the degree of particle breakage with fractal dimension, breakage factor, and specific surface. Particle shape and coordination number both show a scale-dependent evolution pattern.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations105
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207