MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366502831 · doi:10.11159/icgre23.107

Grain-Based Modeling Of The Macro-Mechanical Behavior Of Crystalline Rock Considering The Heterogeneity Of Grain Boundary Contacts

2023· article· en· W4366502831 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiongyu Hu, Marte Gutierrez, Zhiwei Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersColorado School of MinesU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsMacroGrain boundaryMaterials scienceGrain boundary strengtheningGrain sizeGeologyComposite materialComputer scienceMicrostructure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grain-Based Model (GBM) based on the Discrete Element Method (DEM) has been widely used to simulate the rock specimen under load realistically.A common problem in the current implementation of GBM is that only a single bond parameter is used on the grain boundaries.However, there are several minerals present in the rock specimens.For this purpose, this study focuses on accurately simulating the rock specimen based on the GBM model by considering various grain boundary contacts between different minerals.A GBM was proposed and incorporated into the Particle Flow Code (PFC), which can capture the intergranular textures of rock.The model is applied to reproduce the laboratory response of Lac du Bonnet granite.An iterative calibration approach is developed to match the unconfined compressive (UCS) of the models to those of the laboratory results.The transition in the failure mode, stress-strain response, and the evolution of inter and intra-grain micro-cracks were systematically examined and compared with those derived from the traditional model with a single bond parameter for grain boundary.The results show that the inter cracks are more dispersed in the specimen in the new model, especially at the pre-peak stage.At the post-peak stage, inter-grain tensile and shear cracks still dominate the microcrack distributions in the traditional model; in contrast, the intra-grain cracks dominate the microcrack distributions in the new model.The order in which the micro-cracks appear significantly differs between traditional approaches and the new model.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical and Geomechanical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207