MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409722804 · doi:10.38035/gijes.v3i1.353

Field Soil Density Analysis Using the Sand Cone Method on the Segayam–Lebak Gedong Road Improvement Project, Ogan Ilir Regency

2025· article· en· W4409722804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rahmad Hidayat Saputra, Anna Elvaria

Bibliographic record

VenueGreenation International Journal of Engineering Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road infrastructure is crucial for the economy's smooth functioning, but its current state is largely due to natural and human factors, leading to increased traffic. Quality control is essential in road construction planning, focusing on aggregates, subgrade, and subbase layers. Factors such as water content, soil type, and compacted soil can affect soil density. A dense sub-base layer provides good bearing capacity, strengthening road construction. Improving road infrastructure is essential for maintaining the economy's lifeblood, supporting people's movement and influencing distribution and logistics activities. With the development of cities and technological advancements, national roads have grown, passing through provincial capitals and regency/city capitals. The Ogan Ilir Regency Government, through the Public Works and Housing Office, is working to meet community needs in road infrastructure, particularly in rural areas. However, many road conditions in Ogan Ilir Regency still need repairs and improvements. Road improvement in Ogan Ilir Regency should be carried out using good methods and optimal supervision. The sand cone method, which employs Ottawa sand as a parameter for soil density, is used to inspect the field density of the compacted soil layer or pavement layer.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreenation International Journal of Engineering ScienceSame topicGeotechnical and construction materials studiesFrench-language works237,207