MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293089547 · doi:10.1111/ffe.13819

Experimental investigation of fiber content and length on curing time‐dependent mode‐I fracture behavior and properties of cemented paste backfill and implication to engineering design

2022· article· en· W4293089547 on OpenAlexafffund
Kun Fang, Liang Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFiberMaterials scienceStiffnessFracture toughnessComposite materialToughnessCuring (chemistry)Fracture (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The inclusion of fiber in cemented paste backfill (CPB) can significantly alter the mechanical response of the CPB body. The intrinsic defects in CPB and the potential dynamic loading condition make it necessary to investigate the fracture properties of fiber‐reinforced CPB (FR‐CPB). The mode‐I fracture behavior and properties are crucial to the successful engineering application of FR‐CPB technology used in underground mines. The contribution of fiber length and content to the evolutive mode‐I fracture behavior and properties of FR‐CPB was examined in this study. The results show that the addition of fiber reduces the prepeak stiffness but improves the mode I fracture toughness (KIc), and the improvement in KIc increases with fiber length. In contrast, the initial increase in fiber content (from 0% to 0.5%) benefits the KIc acquisition, while a further increase in fiber content from 0.5% to 0.75% poses a negative influence on the KIc development. Moreover, with the adoption of the cement hydration model, four predictive functions are proposed to describe the contribution of fiber length and content to the development of fracture properties. In addition, KIc is identified as a more reliable fracture property for assessing the immediate ground support role played by the FR‐CPB structure. The findings are helpful when it comes to the determination of the fiber length and content in FR‐CPB design.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & StructuresSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207