MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7067155378

Laboratory Testing Methodology to Investigate the Influence of Moisture Availability on Frost Heave

2025· dissertation· en· W7067155378 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrost heavingPermafrostFrost (temperature)MoistureCold climateFrost weathering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seasonal frost heave impacts critical infrastructure in northern regions and creates design challenges for engineers. It occurs where there is simultaneously a frost susceptible soil, cold temperatures, and a ready supply of water. About 40% of Canada’s landmass is permafrost and, with northern infrastructure designed for specific environmental conditions, it is expected that climate change will create unique challenges (Palko & Lemmen, 2017) (Government of Canada, 2019). One of these changes will be the moisture availability over the life of a project. Frost heave theories and mechanics have been well established; however, there has been little experimental research done to assess the effects of variable moisture conditions on a fine-grained soil during freezing. This thesis builds on the laboratory testing methodologies for one dimensional freezing completed by others and explores moisture availability conditions during three laboratory freezing experiments on an artificially created frost susceptible soil

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207