MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

End of the Induction Period in Ordinary Portland Cement as Examined by High‐Resolution Scanning Electron Microscopy

2008· article· en· W2124188427 on OpenAlexaff
J.M. Makar, Gordon Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Ceramic Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduction periodPortland cementCalcium silicate hydrateScanning electron microscopeMaterials scienceCementIsothermal processMineralogySilicateMicroscopyNanoscopic scaleChemical engineeringAluminateAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Period (music)Composite materialChemistryNanotechnologyOpticsThermodynamicsChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The early stages of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) hydration were studied by cold field emission scanning electron microscopy and isothermal conduction calorimetry. Particular attention was paid to samples from the end of the induction period, where an additional peak in the tricalcium silicate hydration reaction has recently been discovered. Higher resolution images were obtained than is possible with current in situ imaging techniques, allowing for the observation of features on the 5‐nm scale. The peak in the hydration at the end of the induction period was associated with both the formation of pores in the surface of the cement grains and the formation of nanoscale calcium silicate hydrate (C–S–H) structures on those surfaces. The effects of grinding of OPC and additions of tricalcium aluminate and tetracalcium aluminoferrite on the peak at the end of the induction period were also examined. The results of the study were compared with the models in the literature used to describe the causes of the induction period and its end.

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)0.000
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 score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations59
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Ceramic SocietySame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207