Consequences of scalping and scalping/replacement procedures on strength properties of coarse-grained gap-graded soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaluation of shear strength characteristics of coarse-grained soils by performing laboratory tests resorts often to a scalping or scalping/replacement procedure due to the presence of oversized particles in comparison with the device size. This work aimed to study consequences of these two procedures on the resulting shear strength characteristics. Experimental tests were performed on soils having gap-graded particle size distributions by using triaxial apparatuses with small and medium diameters Φ = 50 and 100 mm. Original soils were mixtures of fine particles (sand and glass beads) and coarse particles (two types of gravel). The original soils were scalped and (or) scalped/replaced by two different procedures. Different factors that influenced the mechanical properties of the scalped and scalped/replaced soils in comparison with those of the original soils were analyzed: ( i) the compactness parameter controlled for scalped and scalped/replaced soils, ( ii) the fine content of the original soils, and ( iii) the procedure used for the scalping/replacement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".