MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CPT calibration chamber testing on tailings

2024· article· en· W4398203625 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

VenueIOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsCalibrationEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMetallurgyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The cone penetration test (CPT) is a widely used technique for on-site investigations. In the field, interpretation correlations of CPT can be established using laboratory calibration chamber tests. Empirical and theoretical correlations were developed for clay and sand under undrained and drained conditions, respectively. However, interpreting these results can be more challenging for intermediate soils that exhibit partial drainage during penetration and lie between fully undrained and drained conditions. Tailings, which are the by-products of mining and are often rich in fine particles, are a typical example of such intermediate soils. To gain a deeper understanding of the behavior of the tailings during CPT, a calibration chamber test was performed at a standard rate of 2 cm/s and subsequently at a slow rate of 0.02 cm/s, and the obtained results were analyzed.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.203 · 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