A size‐dependent energy‐based strain burst criterion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents a size‐dependent energy‐based strain burst criterion linking strength, elasticity, fracture energies and specimen size effect with stress state due to changes in boundary conditions. It proposes the concept of a ‘Burst Envelope’, a surface in three‐dimensional principal stress space derived based on energy storing and dissipation characteristics of a rock sample, taking into account the size of the specimen and potential localised failure pattern. A scalar burst index is also proposed to quantify the bursting scale. To illustrate and verify its functioning, a numerical modelling framework based on the distinct element method and employing a new cohesive‐frictional contact model is used to perform virtual strain burst experiments under different polyaxial loading‐unloading scenarios, mimicking various underground excavation scenarios. The obtained results are in good agreement with the theoretical prediction of burst occurrence. On that basis, the variation of burst possibility and magnitude are investigated with key factors, including confinement level and the material's elastic, strength and fracture properties. The effect of the specimen's aspect ratio and size on the rock burst potential is elaborated and verified using virtual strain burst experiments, facilitating the linking of the proposed theoretical framework with the evaluation of in‐situ strain bursts in rock masses around underground openings.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".