A reactive transport model for evaluating the long-term performance of stainless steels in concrete
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One significant challenge facing the world today is the decay of infrastructure. A major component of infrastructure decay is the degradation of bridges and highways due to corrosion of the embedded reinforcing steel. This problem has prompted the development of a variety of alternative strategies for increasing the service life of reinforced concrete structures exposed to harsh environments. Over the last two decades, many advanced metallic and non-metallic materials have been developed for withstanding severe corrosion typically encountered in concrete bridge decks. However, adoption of these materials by industry has fallen far short of initial expectations, due in a large extent to a lack of tools to evaluate their long term in-service performance. At present, very little reliable information is available for evaluating the corrosion performance of advanced reinforcement materials available in the market for bridge decks over the entire service life of the structure. Based on first principles, a comprehensive reactive transport model is proposed in this study for predicting the occurrence of general and localized corrosion in concrete bridge decks. Preliminary results show excellent agreement with experimental data under various environmental conditions.
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 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 it