MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142486577

Dynamic Appraisal of Water-Soil Safety of Dump in Coal Field

2004· article· en· W3142486577 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

Venue中国矿业大学学报(英文版) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTechnology and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand reclamationStage (stratigraphy)Environmental scienceLandformSubsidenceSoil waterErosionHydrology (agriculture)Soil conservationMining engineeringGeologyGeotechnical engineeringSoil scienceGeographyGeomorphology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking Pingshuo West Dump (247. 91 hm2) for example, an evaluating model of water-soil safety was set up according to 8 disaster factors of soil erosion: 30 rain rainfall intensity, surface material, landform and slope gradient, cover-degree, topographic, engineering measure grade of conservation of water-soil, volume weight and irregular subsidence. In new stage, early stage and later stage of reclamation, the degree of safety and the different site conditions were analyzed by the model. The results indicat that the dump belongs to middle danger, low danger and low safety in new stage, early stage and later stage of reclamation respectively. But at the same stage, different site conditions lead to different safety class because of the different disaster factors.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.230 · 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