Accurate measurement techniques and prediction approaches for the in-situ rock stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The precise calculation and evaluation of the in-situ rock stress tensor is a crucial factor in addressing the major challenges related to subsurface engineering applications and earth science research. To improve the accuracy of in-situ stress measurement and prediction, an improved overcoring technique involving a measurement circuit, temperature compensation, and calculation method is presented for accurately measuring the in-situ rock stress tensor. Furthermore, an embedded grey BP neural network (GM-BPNN) model is established for predicting in-situ rock stress values. The results indicate that the improved overcoring technique has significantly improved the stress measurement accuracy, and a large number of valuable stress data obtained from many mines have proved the testing performance of this technique. Moreover, the mean relative errors of the prediction results of GM(0, 1) for the three principal stresses all reach 6-30%, and the accuracy of the model fails to meet the requirements. The average relative errors of the prediction results of the BPNN model are all less than 10%, and the model accuracy meets the requirements and has sufficient credibility. Compared with the GM and BPNN models, the embedded GM-BPNN model produces the best results, with mean relative errors of 0.0001-4.8338%. The embedded GM-BPNN model fully utilizes the characteristics of grey theory and BP neural network, which require a small sample size, weaken the randomness of the original data, and gradually approach the accuracy of the model, making it particularly suitable for situations with limited stress data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".