Laboratory investigation of the fracture behavior of polycrystalline ice. Phase II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tests described in this data report have been designed primarily to test the repeatability of results from Phase I of testing. In Phase I, indentation tests were performed as a joint collaboration between Memorial University of Newfoundland and the Institute for Ocean Technology (NRC-IOT). The test specimens were made of polycrystalline ice with a grain size of ~4 mm. Two cm cubed monocrystals were placed at specific locations within the specimen with the c-axis of the monocrystal placed either parallel or perpendicular to the axis of indentation. Four groups of tests were completed as part of Phase II. Group 1 tested specimens that did not include an embedded monocrystal. This will allow for a more thorough investigation of the influence of the presence of an embedded crystal. Group 2 consisted of a number of repeats of experiments from Phase I. This group will be used to investigate the influence of the orientation of the c-axis of the embedded monocrystal. Group 3 used ice specimens with no embedded crystal and were performed at a velocity expected to produce cyclic loading. This will allow the link between cyclic loading and ice crushing to be studied in greater detail. Finally, Group 4 consisted of tests performed on specimens with the same dimensions as in phase I but with different compositions (compressed snow, ~4mm polycrystalline ice with air bubbles, and bubble-free ice with a highly irregular grain structure). This will allow the influence of ice composition to be studied in greater detail.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".