MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110103430 · doi:10.2298/tsci2006869z

Ground subsidence mechanism analysis of Longgui salt rock mining area: Case study

2020· article· en· W3110103430 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThermal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeoscience and Mining Technology
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeologyGroundwater-related subsidenceSubsidenceMining engineeringGroundwaterAquiferRoofGround subsidencePermeability (electromagnetism)Longwall miningConglomerateGeotechnical engineeringCoal miningGeomorphologyCivil engineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The water-soluble mining is often accompanied by ground subsidence, which could result in the severity of ground subsidence disasters. The roof of the salt-bearing strata in the Longgui salt rock mining area is close to the third aquifer, which is mostly composed of muddy conglomerate and other porous rocks with large porosity and permeability. The water-soluble mining for many years has caused serious ground subsidence in the mining area, and there is a tendency to accelerate subsidence. Taking Longgui salt rock mine as a case, the mining subsidence mechanism was analyzed and discussed through the water dissolution simulation test. This study is of great significance to the prevention and control of ground subsidence disasters in Longgui salt rock mine, and also has certain reference value for other similar mining areas.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.218 · 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