MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752195420 · doi:10.1680/jmacr.16.00417

Automatic image analysis process to appraise segregation resistance of self-consolidating concrete

2017· article· en· W2752195420 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Nili, Mehrdad Razmara, Maryam Sadeghi, Majid Razmara

Bibliographic record

VenueMagazine of Concrete Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMetaOptima Technology (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilica fumeMortarAggregate (composite)Materials scienceFly ashComposite materialCementCompressive strengthGeotechnical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The segregation of coarse aggregate in self-consolidating concrete (SCC) can result in some defects in the long-term properties of concrete. In this study, an image processing algorithm has been proposed and implemented, using standard coding languages, to assess segregation of the SCC mixtures. This algorithm has been designed to evaluate the distribution of coarse aggregate and the average thickness of the mortar band layer of SCC. Seven mixtures containing fly ash and silica fume as partial replacements for cement were analysed. Slump, J-ring flow and compressive strength of the samples were also measured. The results revealed that an increase in fly ash replacement resulted in a higher segregation index and a higher ratio of mortar band thickness. However, substitution of silica fume caused a lower segregation index and a lower ratio of mortar band thickness. The results demonstrate that there is a high degree of correlation between the segregation index and the mortar band thickness in all the mixtures.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagazine of Concrete ResearchSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207