Results of a dilatancy round robin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The critical state approach currently finds widespread adoption in geotechnical engineering practise, particularly with respect to tailings storage facilities. The laboratory component of such works usually involves determination of the critical state line (CSL) followed by stress- and state-dilatancy behaviour in triaxial compression conditions, characterised by the volumetric coupling parameter Ntc and the state dilatancy constant χtc. While the reliability of CSL testing using current state of practise methods has been recently demonstrated, it is currently unclear how reproducibly Ntc and χtc can be obtained. To investigate this, a dilatancy round robin programme was carried out by five laboratories who regularly carry out such testing. In the first stage of the programme, each laboratory adopted a version of ‘densification in layers’, either dense moist tamping or vibration-densification. While a generally consistent Ntc was observed, significant variation in χtc was seen. To further investigate this variation, a second stage was carried out where slurry deposition and the ‘air-dried’ technique were used. These techniques showed better agreement between laboratories, while also producing lower values of χtc than densification in layers. Some potential implications of these observations on current tailings engineering laboratory testing practise are outlined.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".