Characterizing Porosity and Diffusive Properties of Monolithic Cement-Based Solidified/Stabilized Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents the application of a single reservoir diffusion test to determine both the effective porosity of a soil-cement matrix and the diffusivity of tritium through saturated, monolithic, cement solidified/stabilized wasteforms. Testing was performed on a laboratory mixture of cement paste, sand, and kaolinite. The influence of porosity on the proper interpretation of the diffusion tests was examined. Results of tests on three replicate specimens were consistent and indicate effective porosities of 0.26 to 0.28 and effective diffusive coefficients of 2.5 × 10−10 to 3.0 × 10−10 m2/s. The effect of curing time is discussed. Products of the effective diffusion coefficients and porosity (neDe) decreased by 22 % from specimens cured for 14 days to specimens cured for 28 days prior to testing while from 70 to 126 days of curing neDe only changed by 8 %. This suggests that curing should be carried out for greater than 70 days prior to conducting these tests.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".