MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293173296 · doi:10.1680/jgere.22.00017

Shear characteristics of the rock/cemented tailings interface exposed to sulfate attack

2022· article· en· W4293173296 on OpenAlexaff
Kun Fang, Mamadou Fall

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSulfateTailingsShear (geology)Direct shear testGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceCementitiousComposite materialGeologyMetallurgyCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A clear understanding and accurate assessment of the mechanical properties of the interface between backfill material and the adjacent rock mass is paramount to a safe and economical design of cemented paste backfill (CPB) structures. With the CPB being a cementitious material, sulfate compounds prevalent in the mining environment may affect the shear characteristics of the CPB–rock interface. However, there are currently no research studies on the long-term shear behaviour of the CPB–rock interface exposed to sulfate attack, although CPB often contains a relatively large amount of sulfate ions. This paper presents and discusses the findings obtained through experimental investigation of the impact of the initial sulfate concentration in CPB on the shear characteristics of the interface between rock and CPB cured for long durations. The obtained results show that sulfate considerably influences the long-term shear strength and behaviour of the interface. Sulfate can either negatively or positively alter the shear properties of the mature CPB–rock interface due to the competition between the processes that reduce or increase the strength at the interface. The dominant process is a function of the initial sulfate content and the curing time.

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)0.000
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical ResearchSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207