MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3050596158 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2020-0209

Static liquefaction behaviour of gold mine tailings

2020· article· en· W3050596158 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guillermo A. Riveros, Abouzar Sadrekarimi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsLiquefactionGeotechnical engineeringSiltShearing (physics)GeologySlurryShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)Soil waterMaterials scienceMetallurgyComposite materialSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Static liquefaction failure of tailings impoundments has been a persistent issue for the mining industry for many decades. In this study, the monotonic shearing response and instability of gold tailings are examined through a series of constant-volume and drained direct simple shear tests on slurry-deposited and moist-tamped specimens. The experiments were carried out on both the silt and the sand tailings produced at the mill and separated for use in dam construction. Laboratory shear wave velocity measurements made by means of bender element tests were also used to relate the shearing response and strength of the tailings to an in situ geophysical measurement. Specimen fabric differences produced by the different preparation methods do not translate into significant differences in the critical state line, liquefaction triggering or post-liquefaction strength for the sand tailings. Additionally, common trends of undrained yield and post-liquefaction strength ratios with state parameter were observed for both the sand and the silt tailings despite their different fines contents. An empirical method to evaluate the onset of instability and the post-liquefaction strength of the tailings using shear wave velocity is proposed.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics→French-language works237,207→