Development of chloride binding capacity in cement pastes and influence of the pH of hydration products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study deals with the chloride binding capacity of cementitious materials. The binding capacities of ordinary Portland cement (OPC), 30% pulverized fuel ash (PFA), 60% ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), and 10% silica fume (SF) pastes were monitored for 150 d using the water extraction method and the pH of the suspension (ground sample in distilled water) was simultaneously measured at 150 d. Results show that the binding capacity always increased with time, irrespective of binder, and the order of binding capacity with binders was 60% GGBS > 30% PFA > OPC > 10% SF. The pH of suspensions increased with time up to about 10 d, presumably due to a leaching out of alkalis, and then kept a certain value that was dependent on binder type. It was also found that an increase in the concentration of hydroxyl ions, derived from the pH of the suspension, resulted in a decrease in the mole ratio of free chloride to hydroxyl ions, reflecting the lower risk of steel corrosion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".