MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981991880 · doi:10.1139/l07-072

Dry-cast concrete masonry products: properties and durabilityThis article is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue on Masonry.

2007· article· en· W1981991880 on OpenAlexaffvenue
S.E. Chidiac, Hassan Zibara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSorptivityDurabilityMasonryCuring (chemistry)Materials scienceCementComposite materialPorosityGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance of dry-cast concrete masonry products (DCCMPs), which are becoming the product of choice for many applications, has yet to be assessed in a comprehensive manner. This study was undertaken to investigate the effects of mix design and manufacturing parameters on the mechanical and transport properties, as well as the freeze–thaw (F/T) durabilities, of DCCMPs. The variables studied were water to cement ratio, mixing time, vibration time, and curing regime. Freeze–thaw durability was assessed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard C1262 by exposing specimens to four conditions: water, 3% NaCl, 4% CaCl2, and 4% MgCl2 solutions. Results revealed that 3% NaCl exposure yielded the most mass loss due to scaling, whereas 4% MgCl2 exposure exhibited the least. Increase in either water content, vibration time, mixing time, or use of moist curing led to improvement in the mechanical properties, refinement of large pores in the range of 40 to 400 μm, reduction of total porosity, and enhancement of F/T durability of capstones. Ionic sorptivity yielded a strong statistical correlation with mass loss due to F/T action in the presence of 3% NaCl and 4% CaCl2.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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