Data Compilation from Large Drained Compression Triaxial Tests on Coarse Crushable Rockfill Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigating the mechanical properties of rockfills requires laborious, time-consuming, and expensive large-scale testing. Therefore, practitioners frequently adopt design parameters based on a limited number of reports with experimental results. With the aim of enlarging and consolidating the database on the mechanical behavior of coarse rockfills, this paper compiles 158 drained triaxial compression tests conducted on 33 different materials, performed on samples ∼1 m in diameter and having a maximum particle size between 100 and 200 mm. Data are analyzed in terms of particle breakage, shear strength, and stiffness. The results are compared with limits for high and low shear strength previously reported. At confining pressures lower than 0.2 MPa, rockfills consistently have a maximum internal friction angle higher than 45°; at high pressure, this value decreases to a range between 30° and 40°, mainly due to degradation caused by particle breakage. Average secant Young’s moduli for all uniform and well-graded rockfills analyzed are in the typical range for loose sands, characterized by a normalized secant modulus of 100 to 200.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".