Evaluation of the Effect of Geomechanical Parameters and In Situ Stress on Tunnel Response Using Equivalent Mohr-Coulomb and Generalized Hoek-Brown Criteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The generalized Hoek-Brown (GHB) failure criterion can estimate the rock mass parameters required for rock mechanics–related analyses such as numerical modeling in geomechanics. The determination of GHB parameters has been developed in the field of rock mechanics. Due to the wide use of the Mohr-Coulomb criterion and the lack of an existing relationship for determining its parameters for a rock mass, equivalent Mohr-Coulomb parameters (EMC) can be derived from the GHB. To determine the differences in the use of these two criteria, we analyzed the behavior of a deep circular tunnel in nine stress states for three metamorphic rocks recovered from the Canadian Shield from rock masses that present a very blocky structure. We carried out 241 simulations using the finite element code RS2 to assess the effect of the geological strength index (GSI), in situ stress, and rock type on the deviation of wall displacement, the number of yielded elements, and the differential stress obtained by the GHB and EMC parameters. A combination of low in situ stress and high GSI yielded similar results when using both failure criteria.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".