MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297534207 · doi:10.1520/gtj20220129

Closure to “Discussion of ‘Determining Soil Plasticity Utilizing Manafi Method and Apparatus’ by M. S. G. Manafi, A. Deng, A. Taheri, M. B. Jaksa, and N. HB”

2022· article· en· W4297534207 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosure (psychology)Geotechnical engineeringConsistency (knowledge bases)PlasticityMeaning (existential)GeologyMathematicsMaterials sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophyEpistemologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article concludes the Discussion on the Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJ-2022-0093, with three objectives: (1) clarifying the meaning of “consistency” and “toughness,” (2) elaborating the combined qualitative and quantitative approach, and (3) justifying the practicality of the Manafi method for a wide range of fine-grained soils regardless of their soil type.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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