Partially drained uplift behaviour of plant roots in dilative soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large volume of research reporting the pull-out behaviour of root systems is available, but no study has considered the effects of soil drainage. This work implemented a modified three-dimensional embedded beam element model in a finite element platform that solved model equations by using a fully hydromechanically coupled algorithm. The model was validated against published centrifuge pull-out tests on root analogues, and the validated model was then applied to study parametrically the influence of the ratio of uplift rate to soil hydraulic conductivity on pull-out behaviour. The results demonstrated that the model can well capture the prepeak behaviour of the root systems up to the peak pull-out resistance. The generation of negative pore–water pressure ( p e x) owing to soil dilation upon root–soil interfacial shearing was the major reason for increased pull-out resistances under partially drained conditions. Compared with other root systems, root systems with smaller branch angles and deeper branch depths mobilised considerably more significant plastic deviatoric strains in the soil in their vicinity, generating more negative p e x. Hyperbolic dimensionless backbone curves were derived to explain the transitional pull-out behaviours of root systems of different geometries under drainage conditions that ranged from fully drained to undrained.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".