Performance and Microanalysis of Cement Asphalt Mortar With Admixture of Coal Fly Ash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, cement asphalt mortars prepared with three different cementitious material were systematically investigated: C1 ordinary Portland cement, C2sulfoaluminate cement, C3 (sulfoaluminate: ordinary Portland cement: fly ash=3:6:1) according to the technical indices of cement asphalt mortar for Chinese high speed railway (CRTS II). The C2 CA mortar shows early strength due to the early hydration process between the sulfoaluminate cement and water while the workability is not as excellent as C3 group which not only shows great performance in physical and mechanical properties but also has a good fluidity and workable time to meet the requirement of CRTS II. Through the microstructure analysis, it was found that cement asphalt mortar is a porous structure and the hydration between cement and free water happened at the early age while an integrated formed amorphous gel play an important role in the strength development of the CA mortar as the strength development to 28 days.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".