MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286660277 · doi:10.1680/jcoma.15.00071

The enigma of the ‘so-called’ alkali–carbonate reaction

2016· article· en· W2286660277 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tetsuya Katayama, Viggo Jensen, Christopher A. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Construction Materials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrographyExpansiveCarbonateQuartzMineralogyAggregate (composite)Alkali–aggregate reactionAlkali metalGeologyCalciteGeochemistryArchaeologyChemistryMaterials scienceMetallurgyHistoryPaleontologyComposite materialOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The so-called alkali–carbonate reaction (ACR) consists of two distinct reactions: the non-expansive dedolomitisation reaction and deleteriously expansive alkali–silica reaction of cryptocrystalline quartz hidden in the dolomitic limestone aggregate. In the past, dedolomitisation was confused with ACR and regarded as associated with the expansion mechanism, whereas alkali–silica gel was not observed using conventional optical microscopy. This led to a long-standing controversy, but the enigma has been resolved by careful petrographic examination of typical ACR concretes made with the type aggregate from the Pittsburg quarry, Ontario, including an experimental sidewalk in Kingston. This paper introduces the historical background of this issue and the essence of recent studies from the petrographic viewpoint by the authors who actually examined the typical ACR in Ontario.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Construction MaterialsSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207