MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410800775 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2024-0301

Geotechnical properties of nanoscale fumed silica-based transparent clay

2025· article· en· W4410800775 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yunzhou Li, Hang Zhou, Guoquan Qi, Ronglin Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeotechnical engineeringFumed silicaGeologyMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanical properties of transparent soil influence its reliability in visualization-based model tests. This paper investigates the static and dynamic behavior of nanoscale fumed silica under water-based pore fluid conditions. Initially, index tests suggested that its Atterberg limits and compressibility in water-based fluid exhibited a degree of similarity to highly organic clays. Additionally, monotonic and cyclic shear tests were conducted to compare its geomechanical properties with highly organic soils. Microscopic analyses were then conducted using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) under various pore fluids. Results indicated that the critical state friction angle of fumed silica, obtained from conventional triaxial compression tests, was 40.6°, comparable to many highly organic soils. It also exhibited a high peak friction angle and low cohesion, reinforcing its behavioral similarities to these soils. The normalized undrained strength ratio matched that of silt. The cyclic behavior corresponded with highly plastic soils, while the shear modulus decay curves were comparable to those of highly organic soils. However, the damping ratio remained lower. SEM and FTIR verified that the concentrated surface functional groups may be the reason for the high friction angle characteristics of fumed silica.

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 score0.006

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207