Caractérisation en laboratoire du potentiel expansif de granulats de remblais de fondation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pyritic aggregates coming from sedimentary rocks may be subject to expansions when used in subbases, and, in certain cases, may then cause heaving or expansion of concrete slabs with consequences on the structures. This situation occurs in areas where the lack of prime aggregates requires the use of local materials. Swellings are observed and are basically related to the oxidation of sulphides such as pyrite, pyrrhotite, and chalcopyrite, which are present in aggregates. As a result of this oxidation, sulphuric acid is formed and reacts to produce gypsum, which is responsible for the increase of volume. This paper is a contribution to a better understanding of this topical phenomenon and also includes the procedure of characterization used for four aggregates to determine their expansive potential by using an experimental device developed at the laboratory. Different reactivity modes take place involving processes such as swelling and sulphate attack or even the combination of the two modes, which are corroborated by the intrinsic properties of the aggregates used in this study.Key words: subbase, aggregates, pyrite, oxidation, gypsum, swelling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".