MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401224245 · doi:10.1029/2024gl109308

Pressure Dependence of Permeability in Cracked Rocks: Experimental Evidence of Non‐Linear Pore‐Pressure Gradients From Local Measurements

2024· article· en· W4401224245 on OpenAlexaff
Gang Lin, Samuel Chapman, Dmitry Garagash, J. Fortin, Alexandre Schubnel

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersInstitut national des sciences de l'UniversCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Pore water pressureFluid dynamicsBrittlenessLinearityMineralogyMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding the coupling between rock permeability, pore pressure, and fluid flow is crucial, as fluids play an important role in the Earth's crustal dynamics. We measured the distribution of fluid pressure during fluid‐flow experiments on two typical crustal lithologies, granite and basalt. Our results demonstrate that the pore‐pressure distribution transitions from a linear to a non‐linear profile as the imposed pore‐pressure gradient is increased (from 2.5 to 60 MPa) across the specimen. This non‐linearity results from the effective pressure dependence of permeability, for which two analytical formulations were considered: an empirical exponential and a new micromechanics‐based model. In both cases, the non‐linearity of pore pressure distribution is predicted. Using a compilation of permeability versus Terzaghi's effective pressure data for granites and basalts, we show that our micromechanics‐based model has the potential to predict the pore pressure distribution over the range of effective pressures expected within the brittle crust.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicearthquake and tectonic studies→French-language works237,207→