MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235160680 · doi:10.17771/pucrio.acad.5907

ENSAIOS DE ARRANCAMENTO EM SOLO REFORÇADO COM MALHAS DE PNEUS

2004· dissertation· pt· W4235160680 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
FERNANDO AUGUSTO FERREIRA DO VALLE

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic Research in Diverse Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[pt] A utilização de pneus usados é uma técnica interessante para reforço de solos, sob o aspecto ambiental. Os pneus usados constituem uma matéria-prima abundante e de custo reduzido. A técnica de utilização de pneus em obras geotécnicas vem sendo difundida no Brasil desde meados dos anos 90, com a construção do muro experimental de solopneus da PUC-Rio, em colaboração com a Fundação Geo-Rio e a Universidade de Ottawa (Canadá). O presente trabalho tem por objetivo apresentar a metodologia para avaliação da resistência ao arrancamento de malhas de pneus. Os pneus podem ser dispostos em um plano horizontal e amarrados entre si, formando uma malha de reforço. Podem ser utilizados pneus inteiros ou com uma das bandas laterais cortadas. A sobrecarga atuando no reforço provém do confinamento provocado pela altura do aterro de solo, construído sobre a malha de pneus. Os ensaios de arrancamento dos pneus no campo utilizaram uma estrutura metálica de reação, atirantada, a qual foi desenvolvida especificamente para o programa experimental sobre reforço de solos. Os resultados permitiram idealizar um mecanismo de ruptura envolvido no processo de arrancamento das malhas de pneus, bem como a verificação das características de resistência e deformabilidade deste tipo de reforço.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAcademic Research in Diverse FieldsFrench-language works237,207