MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1901034750 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2013-0109

Modeling of hydration reactions to predict the properties of slag blended concrete

2014· article· en· W1901034750 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiao-Yong Wang, Ki-Bong Park

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsGround granulated blast-furnace slagPortland cementCementFinenessSlag (welding)Materials scienceClinker (cement)Calcium hydroxideMetallurgyHydration reactionHardening (computing)Composite materialChemical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The granulated blast furnace slag is commonly blended with Portland cement or clinker to produce slag blended cement after being ground to the fineness comparable to Portland cement. Hydration of slag-blended cement is much more complex than that of ordinary Portland cement because of the mutual interactions between the cement hydration and the slag reaction. In this paper, by considering the production of calcium hydroxide in cement hydration and its consumption in the reaction of slag, a numerical procedure is proposed to simulate the hydration of concrete containing slag. The numerical procedure includes two sub components, a cement hydration model and a slag reaction model. The heat evolution rate of slag concrete is determined from the contributions of the cement hydration and the slag reaction. Furthermore, the temperature history in hardening blended concrete is evaluated by combining the proposed numerical procedure with a finite element method. The proposed model is verified through experimental data on concrete with different water–cement ratios and mineral admixture substitution ratios.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207