MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989009226 · doi:10.18280/ts.360407

Identification of Microscopic Damage Law of Rocks Through Digital Image Processing of Computed Tomography Images

2019· article· en· W2989009226 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhe Qin, Yu Zhang, Sheng Zhang, Jingwei Zhao, Tengfei Wang, Ke Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaShandong University of Science and TechnologyShandong University
KeywordsPorosityGeologyTomographyDigital imageDigital image processingMineralogyDigital image analysisCore (optical fiber)Geotechnical engineeringImage processingImage (mathematics)Materials scienceArtificial intelligenceComposite materialComputer visionOpticsComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces digital image processing (DIP) to geotechnical field, aiming to disclose the microscopic damage law of rocks under cyclic water invasion. Firstly, the altered granite specimens under cyclic water invasion were subjected to computed tomography (CT) scanning, producing cross-sectional images. These images then underwent noise removal and threshold segmentation. The pores and cores, rock foundation, and high-density nodules were identified accurately in the processed images, reflecting the microstructure of the original rock mass. Based on the processed images, the 3D rock cores were reconstructed, and a 200200200 representative elementary volume (REV) was extracted from each rock core. The analysis results show that, with the growing number of water invasion cycles, the surface porosity and non-closed surface porosity continued to increase, while the closed surface porosity first increased and then declined. This research lays a theoretical basis for applying the DIP in geotechnical field.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207