MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013878136 · doi:10.1680/jgein.20.00016

Back-analysis of the water retention curve of a GCL on the wetting path

2020· article· en· W3013878136 on OpenAlexaff
Mayu Tincopa, Abdelmalek Bouazza, R. Kerry Rowe, Harianto Rahardjo

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosynthetics International · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWettingGeosyntheticsGeosynthetic clay linerGeotechnical engineeringDew pointWater retention curveWater retentionMaterials scienceDewEnvironmental scienceComposite materialGeologySoil scienceSoil waterThermodynamicsHydraulic conductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach is presented to obtain the water retention curve of a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) on the wetting path (i.e. when it is hydrating). This approach is based on a back-analysis process using data from a hydration test. The back-analysis method was validated by comparing it to conventional experimental measurement techniques such as vapour equilibrium, chilled-mirror dew point and osmotic techniques as well as published data. This approach is shown to be a viable alternative to quickly identify the retention properties of a GCL on the wetting path.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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)0.0080.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosynthetics InternationalSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207