MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966215706 · doi:10.1680/jgere.19.00015

Briefing: An experimental procedure to assess the erosional behaviour of cohesionless soils

2019· article· en· W2966215706 on OpenAlexafffund
Fatima Zahra Haouzi, Annette Esnault-Filet, Benoît Courcelles

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsInternal erosionPipingGeotechnical engineeringSoil waterErosionGeologyHydraulic headFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceMechanicsSoil scienceGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective erosion of fine particles from granular soils can affect the draining properties of hydraulic structures with time, and it is important to identify unstable soils and characterise their hydraulic and erosional behaviour. To this end, this study focuses on the design and set-up of a new laboratory device for testing the suffusion and piping phenomenon occurring in an internally unstable cohesionless material. The proposed procedure offers the possibility of quantifying the hydraulic gradient at which erosion starts and evaluates the mass of fine particles washed out of the sample under controlled hydraulic conditions. The quantity of eroded particles, the exit water flow rate and the hydraulic gradient distribution along the flow paths are also measured during the process. The procedure was tested on an erosive soil under saturated conditions and under unconfined seepage, allowing the assessment of the hydraulic behaviour of this internally unstable material.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical ResearchSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207