MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071125266 · doi:10.1520/cca11864

A New Method for Evaluating the Risk of DEF

2004· article· en· W2071125266 on OpenAlexaff
Arezki Tagnit‐Hamou, N. Petrov

Bibliographic record

VenueCement Concrete and Aggregates · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCuring (chemistry)MortarLimeThermal expansionMaterials scienceComposite materialCementThermalMetallurgyThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new method involving a slight acceleration of curing is proposed to evaluate the sensitivity of a particular cement or particular mortars to DEF and consequent expansion. It can be used to determine the maximum concrete temperature below which the risk of DEF is minimal and acceptable. After a heat curing, the specimens were kept in lime-saturated water. On the seventh day, they were submitted to six daily thermal cycles (+50 to +10°C). Expansion is greater when thermal cycles are applied compared to control specimens. Therefore, the absence of expansion of some mortars submitted to thermal cycles enables us to accept the mix, even if the curing temperature is 90°C. This method has been applied successfully in mortar specimens. It is presently being applied on concrete specimens.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCement Concrete and AggregatesSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207