Large-scale laboratory investigation of pillar-support interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underground mine pillars provide natural stability to the mine area, allowing safe operations for workers and machinery. Extensive prior research has been conducted to understand pillar failure mechanics and design safe pillar layouts. However, limited studies (mostly based on empirical field observation and small-scale laboratory tests) have considered pillar-support interactions under monotonic loading conditions for the design of pillar-support systems. This study used a series of large-scale laboratory compression tests on porous limestone blocks to analyze rock and support behavior at a sufficiently large scale (specimens with edge length of 0.5 m) for incorporation of actual support elements, with consideration of different w/h ratios. Both unsupported and supported (grouted rebar rockbolt and wire mesh) tests were conducted, and the surface deformations of the specimens were monitored using three-dimensional (3D) digital image correlation (DIC). Rockbolts instrumented with distributed fiber optic strain sensors were used to study rockbolt strain distribution, load mobilization, and localized deformation at different w/h ratios. Both axial and bending strains were observed in the rockbolts, which became more prominent in the post-peak region of the stress-strain curve.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".