MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400651390 · doi:10.1080/19386362.2024.2377450

Advanced method for estimating the volumetric intensity along tunnels using ANN

2024· article· en· W4400651390 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian Torrico Siacara, Iman Faridmehr, Marlon Sproesser Mathias, Pedro Pazzoto Cacciari

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geotechnical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsIntensity (physics)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceCivil engineeringEngineeringPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulating realistic scenarios with numerical models often demands substantial computational resources, which can be excessively time-consuming. In complex Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) simulations where mutual influence among fracture parameters is crucial, efficient Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms offer a promising solution. This study focuses on the Monte Seco tunnel in Brazil, employing Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) with the Levenberg-Marquardt Algorithm (ANN-LM) to estimate Volumetric discontinuity intensity (P32). Comparative analysis with traditional DFN-based methods reveals superior predictive performance of the ANN model over Multiple Linear Regression (MLR). MATLAB was utilized for implementation, considering the interdependence of geometric parameters across fracture sets to estimate P32 values. Sensitivity analysis identified correlations between F1 parameters (density and trace length) and P32 estimates for F2, aiding in predicting potential tunnel instability. A Graphical User Interface (GUI) was developed to streamline calculations, replacing cumbersome spreadsheet methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207