MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976039609 · doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.06.007

Damage smear method for rock failure process analysis

2019· article· en· W2976039609 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Li, Xiaofeng Cheng, Hai Pu, C.A. Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesState Key Laboratory for GeoMechanics and Deep Underground EngineeringChina University of Mining and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMesoscopic physicsRepresentative elementary volumeCoalescence (physics)Finite element methodStructural engineeringSolverScale (ratio)Constitutive equationGeologyRock mechanicsGeotechnical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Damage smear method (DSM) is adopted to study trans-scale progressive rock failure process, based on statistical meso-damage model and finite element solver. The statistical approach is utilized to reflect the mesoscopic rock heterogeneity. The constitutive law of representative volume element (RVE) is established according to continuum damage mechanics in which double-damage criterion is considered. The damage evolution and accumulation of RVEs are used to reveal the macroscopic rock failure characteristics. Each single RVE will be represented by one unique element. The initiation, propagation and coalescence of meso-to macro-cracks are captured by smearing failed elements. The above ideas are formulated into the framework of the DSM and programed into self-developed rock failure process analysis (RFPA) software. Two laboratory-scale examples are conducted and the well-known engineering-scale tests, i.e. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's (AECL's) Underground Research Laboratory (URL) tests, are used for verification. It shows that the simulation results match with other experimental results and field observations. Keywords: Failure process, Smear method, Meso-damage, Finite element method (FEM), Rock failure process analysis (RFPA)

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207