Effect of Aggregate Particle Size on Determining Alkali-Silica Reactivity by Accelerated Tests
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
Abstract For assessing the rock applicability of accelerated tests for alkali-aggregate reactivity and the effect of aggregate particle size on determining alkali reactivity of concrete aggregates in accelerated tests, experimental studies on microstructure and expansion behaviors of Potsdam sandstone and a Norwegian quartzite were conducted in Concrete Prism Test and in various accelerated tests, i.e., Accelerated Mortar Bar Test, Chinese Autoclave Method, and Chinese Accelerated Mortar Bar Test. Results indicate that, in comparison with Concrete Prism Test results, the alkali expansivity of both rocks are generally underestimated in these accelerated tests. It is mainly attributed to the use of a large proportion of very fine aggregate particles in which the original microtexture characteristic of rocks was lost during sample preparation. The effects of microtexture and the particle size of aggregate on reasonable prediction of alkali expansivity of aggregates in concrete by accelerated tests were discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it