MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412533763 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2025-0144

Accuracy of pore water pressure measurements using vibrating wire piezometers with fully grouted and bentonite chip seal borehole backfill methods

2025· article· en· W4412533763 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Scott N. Martens

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and Geomechanical Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPiezometerSeal (emblem)BoreholeGeotechnical engineeringBentonitePore water pressureGeologyVibrating wireWater pressureEngineeringAquiferGroundwater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fully grouted method (FGM) to backfill vibrating wire piezometers has become common geotechnical practice; however, the studies upon which acceptance of the FGM has been based considered very limited and specific, steady-state groundwater flow conditions that are not representative of many common conditions encountered in practice. Many geotechnical professionals have uncritically accepted recommendations to adopt the FGM and rely on the FGM in settings where accurate pore water pressure measurements are a matter of public safety, such as dams and hill slopes. The earlier published data that formed the basis for widespread adoption of the FGM did not consider rapid transient pressure changes, such as situations where pore water pressures resulting from application of external stresses (e.g., embankment construction) are induced in a low-permeability soil layer. This paper reports the results of steady state and transient finite element analyses of FGM installations in low permeability clay layers and provides insight into the applicability and limitations of the FGM and conditions where the FGM may result in significant errors in the unconservative direction. Results from field installations are presented that show the errors that can occur with the FGM. Practical recommendations are provided to guide practitioners in minimizing errors.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGeotechnical and Geomechanical EngineeringFrench-language works237,207