MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186869679 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2020-0575

A method to predict desiccation crack depth in a compacted clayey soil

2021· article· en· W3186869679 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arash Hassanikhah, Gerald A. Miller, Amy B. Cerato

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringSuctionShrinkageDesiccationWater contentUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceInfiltration (HVAC)Soil waterStress (linguistics)CrackingGeologyComposite materialSoil scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimation of crack depths and spacing due to desiccation of clayey soils is needed to predict changes in mechanical or hydraulic properties in the cracked layer. These changes affect the infiltration of water, stability, and deformation of a soil mass. Desiccation cracks are associated with increasing suction due to moisture loss accompanied by restrained shrinkage, which results in tensile stresses in near surface soil layers. Cracks propagate when the developed tensile stresses exceed the tensile strength of soil. A simple analytical method is presented to predict crack depths in compacted clayey soil due to changes in matric suction with depth. The model equation is based on the Hookean elastic equation relating incremental strain to incremental stress and incorporates two stress state variables including net normal stress and matric suction. Input to the model equation includes the tensile strength and elastic parameters, and to complete the prediction of crack depth, the suction change profile of interest is needed. The method validity was investigated by comparing predicted crack depths to those observed in soil compacted in a bench scale apparatus for studying desiccation cracking. Tensile strength and elastic properties were determined from tests conducted on soil during desiccation under approximate uniaxial conditions. Predicted crack depths were obtained based on changes in suction interpreted from water content sensors at various depths in the soil bed and compared favorably to observed desiccation crack depths.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207