MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404386888 · doi:10.1061/9780784485842.048

Remote Sensing for Ground Improvement Performance Verification—Hydrocarbon Storage Tanks Constructed on Deep Soil Mix Columns

2024· article· en· W4404386888 on OpenAlexaff
Allen Cadden, Alfredo Rocca, Nick Hudyma, Joe Hinson, Luciano Rocca

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsWSP (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrocarbonStorage tankEnvironmental scienceUnderground storage tankPetroleum engineeringComputer scienceRemote sensingWaste managementEngineeringGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

InSAR satellite-based settlement monitoring was performed on a 47.3-m diameter 18.3-m tall tank constructed over deep soil mix columns. Design settlement calculations estimated perimeter settlements between 60 and 90 mm. InSAR-based settlement measurements conducted over 1,792 days showed undulations corresponding to draining and filling operations and settlements between 52.4 and 70.4 mm at four locations on the tank perimeter. A calibrated soil-ground improvement model was developed to assess the validity of the InSAR settlements. Settlements predicted by the soil-ground improvement settlement model agreed with the InSAR measurements. The model also indicated the tank was between one-quarter and one-half full during the monitoring period, which explains why the InSAR detected and modeled settlements were less than the original settlement calculations. This study shows that InSAR can be used to monitor settlements of hydrocarbon storage tanks constructed over improved ground successfully.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207