MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619843058

Controlling Early-age Transverse Cracking in High Performance Concrete Bridge Decks

2013· dissertation· en· W2619843058 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eric Ying Xian Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Properties and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCrackingBridge (graph theory)Transverse planeStructural engineeringForensic engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research was undertaken to study the effects of high performance concrete (HPC) mix design modifications on the propensity of early-age cracking. Seven mixtures were tested: one 35 MPa conventional concrete (CC) mixture made with ordinary Portland cement with blended slag; one typical 50 MPa HPC mixture containing slag and silica fume; and five modified HPC mixtures using extra set-retarder, increased slag replacement, shrinkage-reducing admixture (SRA), pre-saturated lightweight aggregate (LWA), and decreased cement paste content to improve thermal and/or shrinkage properties. The mixtures were tested for durability, mechanical, thermal, and shrinkage properties. All modified HPC mixtures showed reduced shrinkage relative to the HPC control mixture, and the most shrinkage mitigation was observed in the mixture containing LWA. While SRA reduced restrained shrinkage in HPC to the magnitude of CC, it provided very low rapid chloride penetrability, and using LWA in HPC resulted in significant restrained shrinkage reduction compared to CC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.203
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 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicConcrete Properties and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207