MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405070585 · doi:10.3390/geotechnics4040062

Machine Learning–Enhanced Modeling of Stress–Strain Behavior of Frozen Sandy Soil

2024· article· en· W4405070585 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMitacs
KeywordsStress–strain curveGeotechnical engineeringStress (linguistics)Strain (injury)Computer scienceGeologyMaterials scienceComposite materialDeformation (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many experiments and computational techniques have been employed to explain the mechanical properties of frozen soils. Nevertheless, due to the substantial complexity of their responses, modeling the stress–strain characteristics of frozen soils remains challenging. In this study, artificial neural networks (ANNs) were employed for modeling the mechanical behavior of frozen soil, while different testing strategies were carried out. A database covering stress–strain data from frozen sandy soil subjected to varying temperatures and confining pressures, resulting from triaxial tests, was compiled and employed to train the model. Subsequently, different artificial neural networks were trained and developed to estimate the deviatoric stress and volumetric strain, while temperature, axial strain, and confining pressure were considered as the main input variables. Based on the findings, it can be indicated that the models effectively predict the stress–strain behavior of frozen soil with a significant level of accuracy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.219 · 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