Effect of Superabsorbent Polymers (SAP) on the Freeze-Thaw Resistance of Concrete: Results of a RILEM Interlaboratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents the results of an interlaboratory experimental study performed by 13 international research groups within the framework of the activities of the RILEM Technical Committee 225-SAP “Applications of Superabsorbent Polymers in Concrete Construction”. Two commercially available superabsorbent polymers (SAP) were tested in terms of their influence on the freeze–thaw resistance of ordinary concrete. To test the robustness of the method, all participating laboratories used locally produced materials. Furthermore, following this aim, various accelerated methods were used to estimate the resistance of the concrete to freeze–thaw cycles. The effect of adding SAP was from insignificant to considerably positive in terms of improvement in material performance as determined by reduced mass loss after freeze–thaw cycles; only one participant observed worsening of the material behaviour. At the same time, due to the addition of SAP, a much less pronounced decrease in the dynamic Young’s modulus was observed as a result of freeze–thaw testing without deicing salt.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".