MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191155449 · doi:10.1680/jgein.21.00042

Factors affecting multicomponent GCL-geomembrane interface transmissivity for landfills

2021· article· en· W3191155449 on OpenAlexaff
R. Kerry Rowe, Farhana Jabin

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosynthetics International · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomembraneGeosyntheticsGeosynthetic clay linerLeachateCoatingGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceStress (linguistics)Composite materialEnvironmental sciencePolyethyleneGeologyWaste managementSoil scienceHydraulic conductivitySoil waterEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of laboratory tests were conducted to investigate the interface transmissivity, θ, between a 1.5 mm thick high-density polyethylene geomembrane (GMB) and a multicomponent geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) when permeated with a simulated municipal solid waste landfill leachate under a range of applied stresses (10–150 kPa). The effect of three different prehydration fluids, a 4 mm diameter central coating defect, coating defect position, and the effect of coating orientation of the GCL were investigated. It was found that at an applied stress of less than 70 kPa, the effect of these factors on θ was largely masked by the variability in the initial interface contact condition between the GMB and GCL. At 100–150 kPa, the effects of initial variability were largely eliminated, but there was no notable effect of other factors for multicomponent GCLs on interface transmissivity.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosynthetics InternationalSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207