MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412385091 · doi:10.1007/s00603-025-04743-x

A New Stochastic Rockfall Fragmentation Approach for Lumped Mass Simulations

2025· article· en· W4412385091 on OpenAlexaff
Davide Ettore Guccione, Guilherme Barros, Klaus Thoeni, Zhanyu Huang, Anna Giacomini, Olivier Buzzi

Bibliographic record

VenueRock Mechanics and Rock Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsRocscience (Canada)
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNewcastle University
KeywordsRockfallFragmentation (computing)Rock mass classificationGeologyGeotechnical engineeringStatistical physicsMechanicsMathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsLandslide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a novel fragmentation model for rockfall applications, integrating experimental, theoretical, and numerical observations with stochastic predictions. Extensive experiments with artificial spherical rock-like specimens revealed crucial aspects of block fragmentation upon impact, including fragmentation patterns and the relationship between the number, mass, and velocities of fragments relative to the impact velocity. A stochastic fragmentation prediction model, based on the statistical distribution of material properties of both the falling block and the impacted material, was proposed by the authors. Numerical studies using marble spheres led to a model that stochastically accounts for cumulative damage in the energy required to break the falling block. These insights were incorporated into a fragmentation module within the NURock lump mass trajectory simulator. Validation through targeted simulation, sensitivity analysis, and comparison with in-situ tests confirmed the model's accuracy. The proposed approach significantly advances rockfall simulation, impacting the design of rockfall protection structures by considering block fragmentation and cumulative damage from repeated impacts. This enables more accurate predictions of the masses and energy levels of blocks reaching designated areas, which is crucial for designing effective rockfall protection measures.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRock Mechanics and Rock EngineeringSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207