MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990305076 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2018-0840

Water retention characteristics of iron ore fines

2019· article· en· W2990305076 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hailong Wang, Junichi Koseki, Tomoyoshi Nishimura

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWaseda UniversityIron and Steel Institute of Japan
KeywordsWater retentionCompactionSaturation (graph theory)Soil waterDegree of saturationSuctionGeotechnical engineeringLiquefactionIron oreGeologyMineralogySoil scienceEnvironmental scienceMathematicsMaterials scienceEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluations of water retention characteristics of typical iron ore fines (IOF) were presented, which was part of experimental works for the estimation of liquefaction potential of IOF heaps. The water retention tests were conducted in a suction range from 0.1 to 106 kPa on two IOFs and two artificial soils with various testing techniques. It is observed that water retention characteristic curves of one IOF (IOF-B) converge in terms of the relationship between suction (S) and water content (w) regardless densities of specimens when S exceeds a threshold value (Sth). Based on this finding, water retention characteristics are divided into density and materials affected zones. It is also found that IOFs generally have higher water retention ability than the two artificial soils, from which discussion is made on the effect of specific surface area and mineralogy on water retention characteristics of IOF. Finally, water retention characteristics are linked to compaction curves, from which, with the consideration that degree of saturation at peaks of compaction curves is relatively constant, a safety margin of a recently proposed regulation for maritime transportation of IOF is discussed.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207