MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088480864 · doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2020.08.003

A new interpretation for formation of orthogonal joints in quartz sandstone

2020· article· en· W3088480864 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Le Li, Shaocheng Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyBeddingJoint (building)PerpendicularGeometryCoringBedCompression (physics)Structural engineeringAnisotropyMathematicsMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two vertical and orthogonal systematic joint sets are generally arrayed in a grid pattern on the bedding surface, which are the significant features of flat-lying sandstone terrains. Although extensive researches are reported on this topic, many fundamental problems have still not been solved. Such mutually perpendicular opening-mode fractures are an obvious manifestation of effective tensile stresses in two orthogonal directions in the horizontal bedding plane. A good understanding of these orthogonal joint systems is a key to structural analysis, landscape interpretation, and guidance of resolving a number of very practical problems in engineering, mining and hydrologic projects. Based on an anatomic investigation on the orthogonal joints in the Potsdam sandstone of Cambrian age at Ausable Chasm (New York State, USA) and Beauharnois (Quebec, Canada), we proposed that the orthogonal joints may result from the auxetic effects of quartz-rich sandstone rather than local or regional rotation of the maximum tensile stress (σ3) direction by about 90°. The sandstone beds with negative Poisson's ratios are so fascinating that, when placed under vertical burial compression and layer-parallel extension in one direction (σ3), it becomes stretched in the transverse direction (σ2), producing two orthogonal sets of mutual abutting and intersecting joints (J1 and J2 normal to σ3 and σ2, respectively), and both are normal to the bedding surface. Joint set J1 is more closely-spaced than J2 by a factor of ∼3.3, which is correlated with an average Poisson's ratio of −0.3 for the Potsdam sandstone at the time of joint formation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207