MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416268515 · doi:10.1002/agg2.70250

Organic matter content influence on the hydraulic properties of sandy material

2025· article· en· W4416268515 on OpenAlexaff
Adrien Cabrel Djomo Bouyem, Abdelkabir Maqsoud, Tikou Belem

Bibliographic record

VenueAgrosystems Geosciences & Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatOrganic matterHydraulic conductivityWater contentWater retentionMineralization (soil science)Soil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The performance of the cover system, used in the reclamation of a mine site, is primarily assessed through hydraulic properties, including volumetric water content, suction, and saturated hydraulic conductivity ( k sat ). However, these properties may be influenced by factors such as soil mineralization (which refers to the process by which organic materials are converted into inorganic substances through natural processes), temperature (by the viscosity of water and the activity of microorganisms in the soil), and organic matter content (OMC), which complicate the accurate assessment of cover system performance. To better understand the impact of OMC on hydraulic properties, this study was initiated with two objectives: (i) evaluating the effect of OMC on the water retention curve (WRC) and k sat of a sandy material amended with peat and (ii) proposing equations to predict the WRC of sand amended with organic matter using the Fredlund and Xing model. This was accomplished through laboratory tests that determined the WRC and k sat of sand and sand amended with varying concentrations of peat (0%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, and 15%). The investigation results indicate the air entry value (the suction at which the material begins to desaturate) evaluated using the sand mixture WRC did not show any notable variation. The k sat of the sand mixtures decreases with increasing peat concentration. In terms of prediction, the results obtained for the six mixtures tested in the laboratory showed an excellent agreement between predicted and experimental values, demonstrating the high accuracy with which the WRC s were predicted.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgrosystems Geosciences & EnvironmentSame topicSoil and Unsaturated FlowFrench-language works237,207