MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028347177

An evaluation of base soil-filter compatibility using a triaxial permeameter

2013· other· en· W7028347177 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries and Information Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsHyporeflexiaNucleofectionFusible alloySulfinpyrazoneDiafiltrationProteogenomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Filtration compatibility of base soil and granular filter materials must be addressed in the design of zoned engineered fill structures. The evolution of design practice governing filter compatibility is reviewed, with emphasis placed on the experimental studies that have made the greatest contribution to current guidelines. Design practice governing filter compatibility for cohesionless uniform materials has remained relatively unchanged for the last 70 years. A novel and improved triaxial permeameter is used to test base soil-filter grain size ratios (D₁₅/d₈₅) close to the limit of filter incompatibility. The configuration and operation of the test device are described. Thereafter, data are reported for select combinations of base soil-filter specimens of glass beads that are reconstituted, consolidated and subject to unidirectional seepage flow. Interpretation of the test results addresses the onset of filter incompatibility with reference to independent measurements of change in permeability of the two-layer system and mass loss of the base soil through the filter. A unified framework is presented for interpretation of filter incompatibility, taking into account the influence of stress and hydraulic gradient. The implications of the test results are analyzed and discussed with reference to a confident understanding of base-soil filter compatibility.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.160 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicLibraries and Information ServicesFrench-language works237,207