Evaluation of the Performance of Corrosion-Inhibiting Systems Used in Reinforced Concrete Bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Corrosion inhibitors have long been considered one of the most effective solutions to the problem of corrosion of steel reinforcement in concrete structures, but limited information is available on their actual long-term performance and effectiveness in the field. The field performance and effectiveness of eight commercially available corrosion-inhibiting systems for use in concrete were assessed on a newly reconstructed barrier wall of the Vachon Bridge near Montreal. These corrosion-inhibiting systems included concrete admixtures, reinforcing steel coatings, and concrete surface coatings/sealers. Special rebar ladders were embedded in the barrier wall to provide different thicknesses of concrete cover to provide an initial evaluation of the performance of the applied corrosion-inhibiting systems. On-site corrosion surveys, including half-cell potential and corrosion rate measurements, along with concrete coring were conducted yearly. Parallel electrochemical tests on the performance of corrosion-inhibiting systems were also carried out in the laboratory. The results indicate that the system containing the inorganic-based admixture performed better than the other systems in reducing or delaying the corrosion of reinforcement in the concrete barrier wall.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".