MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563826846 · doi:10.1520/acem20160029

Effect of Surface Preparation on the Deicing Salt-Scaling Resistance of Concrete With and Without SCM: Laboratory and Field Performance in the Presence of Sodium Chloride Deicing Salt

2016· article· en· W2563826846 on OpenAlexaff
Hongyu Yi, M D Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Civil Engineering Materials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFly ashMaterials scienceMortarSalt (chemistry)Aggregate (composite)Slag (welding)ScalingGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialEnvironmental scienceGeologyChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Deicing salt scaling is a form of surface deterioration of concrete, which describes the progressive raveling of mortar, sometimes even coarse aggregate, from the surface. This paper presents findings from both laboratory and field studies on the deicing salt-scaling resistance of concrete incorporating various proportions of fly ash (25 % and 50 %) and slag (30 % and 60 %). In the laboratory study, concrete slabs finished with different methods as well as concrete with non-finished surfaces were tested for deicing salt-scaling resistance. For the field study, larger concrete slabs were cast and cured in the laboratory and then placed outdoors. Deicing salt solution was applied on the slabs following each snowfall during the winter seasons to maintain an ice-free condition on the surface of the slabs. The results from the laboratory study indicate that the reduced salt-scaling resistance of concrete incorporating supplementary cementing materials is not solely depended on the mechanical strength of the concrete itself. It is also shown that concrete containing high levels of fly ash and slag maybe more sensitive to finishing techniques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Civil Engineering MaterialsSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207