Static Liquefaction Triggering and Post-Liquefaction Strengths of Coarse Oil Sand Tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Saturated oil sands tailings can be susceptible to static liquefaction if deposited loosely. The occurrence of static liquefaction can thus pose a major risk to an oil sands tailings dam. This study presents the results of a series of monotonic undrained and drained triaxial compression tests on moist-tamped specimens of coarse oil sands tailings. The experiments were conducted on specimens subjected to isotropic and laterally confined (K0) consolidation loads to assess the effect of stress anisotropy and initial shear stress on the liquefaction behavior of oil sands tailings. The triggering and post-liquefaction undrained strengths normalized by the major consolidation stress were observed to decrease with decreasing relative density or increasing void ratio. A significant effect of anisotropic consolidation was observed, causing higher liquefaction triggering strengths in K0-consolidated specimens than those mobilized in isotropically consolidated specimens. This was, however, diminished at large strains resulting in similar post-liquefaction undrained strength ratios.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".