Stabilisation of soft soil with recycled plaster admixtures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid waste management is a serious problem worldwide as the amounts of produced wastes are increasing annually. For example, the disposal of waste gypsum plasterboard, used as dry walling across the world, represents a serious environmental issue. Therefore, this study examines the potential for reusing plasterboard wastes as a stabiliser material for earthwork projects, especially for organic soft clay soil. Recycled plaster, mixed with cement or lime at different ratios was used as a stabiliser for tested soil. Atterberg limits, scanning electron microscopy, x-ray diffraction, compressive strength, and secant moduli tests were conducted to evaluate the improvement in stabilised soil properties. The results indicate that the inclusion of plaster–cement (B–C) or plaster–lime (B–L) admixtures improved the geomechanical properties of the stabilised soil, with higher admixture concentrations leading to greater improvement. Moreover, the soil specimens stabilised using the B–L admixture exhibited a higher strength gain rate and reduction in plasticity index and water content than those stabilised by the B–C admixture. The development of cementation compounds in a stabilised soil matrix has a considerable effect on permanent strength enhancement. It is concluded that the proposed stabilising technique can be valuable for both waste management and construction industries.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it