Recycling of calcium fluoride sludge as additive in the solidification–stabilization of fly ash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recycling of calcium fluoride sludge as additive in the solidification of fly ash with cement or calcium hydroxide was studied. Fly ash solidified with calcium hydroxide and calcium fluoride sludge failed to achieve a target compressive strength of 200 kN/m 2 over a reaction period of 10 d. White Portland cement had produced good results in comparison with high early strength cement or Portland cement. Compressive strength of the material solidified with white Portland cement was found to be 39% higher than the material solidified with Portland cement. The optimum mix was found to be that with 80% fly ash, 5% white Portland cement, and 15% calcium fluoride sludge. Heavy metal ions and fluorides found in the leachate of stabilized matrix were below the discharge limit. Recycling of calcium fluoride as additive reduced the cost of solidification of fly ash to 41% while helping to transform hazardous sludge into an environmentally friendly material. Key words: solidification, additive, cement, lime, recycling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".