MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7104011292 · doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2025.06.050

Biaxial gradient loading approach with unilateral constraint for testing dilatancy behavior of narrow coal pillar in gob-side entry driving

2025· article· en· W7104011292 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaTaishan Scholar Foundation of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDilatantCoalInstabilityCompressive strengthStress (linguistics)Fractal dimensionFractalConstraint (computer-aided design)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stability of narrow coal pillars is critical for gob-side entry driving (GED), particularly regarding their dilatancy behavior under gradient loads from lateral roof rotation and subsidence. However, few studies have considered the actual stress environment and boundary conditions. In this study, a biaxial gradient loading approach with unilateral constraint was proposed. A corresponding polymethyl methacrylate-steel test device was designed, and the effectiveness of the strategy was verified. Subsequently, biaxial uniform and gradient loading tests with unilateral constraint were conducted on coal samples at different lateral roof rotational angles. Compared with uniform load, coal samples under gradient load exhibited localized failure, with a decrease in compressive strength of 20.87%–54% and a reduction in acoustic emission (AE) energy. Asymmetric dilatancy was significant, with dilatancy stress decreasing by more than 50.48%. The mass of fragments smaller than 20 mm decreased by 81.85%, while fractal dimensions exceeded 2. As the stress gradient increased, localized failure intensified, with compressive strength and AE energy first decreasing and then increasing. The compressed state gradually disappeared, leading to direct dilatancy deformation. The mass of fragments larger than 20 mm increased by 101.37%, and fractal dimensions first increased and then decreased, peaking at 2.55. Moreover, the dilatancy instability mechanism induced by the stress gradient was revealed, and the method for identifying the dilatancy patterns was proposed. The applicability and limitations of the test approach were finally discussed. This study is crucial for accurately understanding and predicting the dilatancy instability of the narrow coal pillar in GED.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueJournal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical EngineeringSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207