MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412755029 · doi:10.11159/iccste25.244

An Initial Discussion of the Persistence and Movement of Water within Fractured Massifs, Case of Drainage Galleries in the Landslide

2025· article· en· W4412755029 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruben Esaú Mogrovejo Gutiérrez

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideGeologyPersistence (discontinuity)MassifMovement (music)DrainageGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last 30 to 50 years, the planet has been accumulating and experiencing changes in the regional water cycle.This variation makes us all, especially in the Andes Mountain range, ask ourselves what is the current state of the persistence and movement of water from a regional to a local approach.We all know that nature is highly complex, even more so when we want to understand the elements that constitute one or more geological masses that make up, for example, a landslide.The physical stability of these is very important for civil works operations, so it is important to understand today more than before not only their properties but also the interaction with the flow of water over time.We invest high costs in indirect investigations and even more so in direct ones, with the desire to know that vertical column of the materials or natural aggregates present in these geological masses, not only understanding it is necessary, but also monitoring over time is essential with the support of hydraulic instrumentation.Given these climatic changes, the central zone of Peru is not immune to an increase in the average rainfall rates that converge in the investigated area, but now we must not only create predictive scenarios, but also expand the expectations that we used to have in the initial monitoring, adding models with high performance in modeling the flow in domains of fractured rocks.The initial results suggest an RMSE below 5%, which is an acceptable value for this initial discussion, which has allowed us to validate the filtration flows that were obtained with a range of 7 m/hr to 18m/hr, comparing them with the flows measured during the construction of these galleries in fractured rocks.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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 venueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation EngineeringSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207