MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158901512 · doi:10.3390/pr9050785

Continuum-Based Approach to Model Particulate Soil–Water Interaction: Model Validation and Insight into Internal Erosion

2021· article· en· W3158901512 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

VenueProcesses · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluidizationMicroscale chemistryInternal erosionGeotechnical engineeringDiscrete element methodMechanicsComputational fluid dynamicsEnvironmental scienceSoil waterFluidized bedSoil scienceGeologyEngineeringMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resolving the interaction between soil and water is critical to understanding a wide range of geotechnical applications. In cases when hydrodynamic forces are dominant and soil fluidization is expected, it is necessary to account for the microscale interactions between soil and water. Some of the existing models such as coupled Computational Fluid Dynamics–Discrete Element Method (CFD-DEM) can capture microscale interactions quite accurately. However, it is often computationally expensive and cannot be easily applied at a scale that would aid the design process. Contrastingly, continuum-based models such as the Two-Fluid Model (TFM) can be a computationally feasible and scalable alternative. In this study, we explored the potential of the TFM to simulate granular soil–water interactions. The model was validated by simulating the internal fluidization of a sand bed due to an upward water jet. Analogous to leakage from a pressurized pipe, the simulation was compared with the available experimental data to evaluate the model performance. The numerical results showed decent agreement with the experimental data in terms of excess pore water pressure, fluidization patterns, and physical deformations in violent flow regimes. Moreover, detailed soil characteristics such as particle size distribution could be implemented, which was previously considered a shortcoming of the model. Overall, the model’s performance indicates that TFM is a viable tool for the simulation of particulate soil–water mixtures.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.209 · 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