MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1936271963 · doi:10.1080/08827508.2015.1055625

Geopolymerization and Its Potential Application in Mine Tailings Consolidation: A Review

2015· review· en· W1936271963 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Review · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsAluminosilicateGeopolymerConsolidation (business)BauxitePortland cementRaw materialEnvironmental scienceWaste managementGeologyCompressive strengthMetallurgyMaterials scienceCementChemistryEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new class of construction materials has been in development in the past several decades through geopolymerization reactions of aluminosilicate minerals, which can potentially replace ordinary Portland cement (OPC). In this paper, the brief history of the development of the geopolymerization technology was reviewed with particular emphasis on the differences between “conventional” geopolymers, alkali-activated metallurgical slags, and zeolites. Studies on both the raw materials and the alkali activators in the geopolymerization processes were also reviewed. As oil sands tailings and many mine tailings contain aluminosilicate minerals as their main constituents, geopolymerization reactions have been explored as a potential technological route to treat these tailings for tailings consolidation and heavy metal fixation.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.294 · 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