Hydration Processes in Pastes of Roman and American Natural Cements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydration of five Roman and American natural cements was analyzed using X-ray diffraction, mercury intrusion porosimetry, and scanning electron microscopy of cement pastes. Two cements were prepared in the laboratory by burning marls from geological sources in Poland (Folwark) and Austria (Lilienfeld). The selection of raw materials and burning conditions were optimized so that the hydraulic nature and appearance of the final burnt materials matched as closely as possible historic Roman cements widely used in the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries in Europe to decorate buildings. Three other cements are produced commercially: quick setting Prompt cement from Vicat, France, and Rosendale cements from Edison Coatings Inc., USA. The hydration of the cements studied was shown to comprise two distinct stages. The immediate setting and early strength is due to the formation of calcium aluminum oxide carbonate (or sulfate) hydroxide hydrates. The development of long-term strength is brought about by the formation of calcium silicate hydrates. Similarities and differences between the individual cements are 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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".