MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407126594 · doi:10.11159/ijci.2025.002

Mitigating Karst Development in Soluble Rocks under Water Pressure Using Chemical Grouts

2025· article· en· W4407126594 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aram Aziz, Mehrdad Ghahremani, Seyed Mohammad Fattahi, Abbas Soroush, Seyed Mohammad Reza Imam

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Civil Infrastructure · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKarstGeologyGeotechnical engineeringGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Karstification, a natural geological process occurring in soluble rocks such as gypsum and anhydrite, poses significant challenges to engineering structures, especially hydraulic ones, due to water infiltration under high pressure and velocity.Therefore, improving the stability of these rocks in water is crucial.This study investigates the impact of water pressure on accelerating dissolution and karstification in soluble rocks.Additionally, it explores methods to control karstification through the application of chemical grouting.The gypsum samples were collected from the Fatha Formation near the Mosul Dam.To simulate karstification, an axial hole was created in the center of gypsum samples, which were then exposed to hydraulic shear stress under various pressure conditions.To mitigate the karstification, two commercially available chemical grouts including polyurethane (PU) and a mixture of acrylic and cement (ARC) were applied to coat the soluble rocks.The study included experiments on both untreated and chemically coated (grouted) samples.The results demonstrated that gypsum solubility increased with rising water pressure, while both PU and ARC successfully inhibited further dissolution of the gypsum rock during the experiment.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Civil InfrastructureSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207