MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lessons Learned from the Treat Island Marine Exposure Site

2016· article· en· W2521944636 on OpenAlexaff
M D Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionAir entrainmentEttringiteChlorideEnvironmental scienceReinforcementCementMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyMetallurgyPortland cement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The marine exposure site on Treat Island near Eastport, Maine, was built more than 75 years ago and during this period a wide range of concrete types have been placed on the site. Treat Island represents a very severe exposure condition with the highest tides in the world, salinity typical of the Atlantic Ocean and approximately 100 freeze-thaw cycles per annum. The various research programs that have used this facility have investigated the effects of numerous parameters including fibre-reinforcement, polymer-impregnation, supplementary cementing materials, sulfur concrete, high-alumina cement, ettringite-based rapid-set binders, w/cm and strength, ultra-high-performance concrete, corrosion-resistant reinforcement, impact of load and cracking, “mechanical air-entrainment”, and use of corrosion-inhibiting admixtures. Performance has been evaluated in a number of ways including visual assessment, pulse velocity, dynamic modulus, chloride profiling, and electro-chemical corrosion monitoring. The paper presents an overview of “lessons learned” with detailed information on factors affecting the rate of chloride ingress.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207