Comparative study on the dynamic properties of lightweight porous concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
100 mm split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) improved by wave shaping technology. The dynamic properties, including strength properties, deformation properties, impact toughness and energy absorption properties, of lightweight porous concretes have been analyzed comparatively, and its application prospects have been discussed. The results show that the two types of lightweight porous concretes are strain rate sensitive. Dynamic compression strength increases with strain rate; the correlation between the peak strain, ultimate strain of lightweight porous concrete and strain rate can be expressed by quadratic polynomial; under the impact loading, the impact toughness of lightweight porous concretes increases with strain rate, the amount of absorbed energy increases with the average incident energy change rate, moreover, the relation between the impact toughness and strain rate, and that between the amount of absorbed energy and the average incident energy change rate can both be expressed by exponential functions; compared with EPSC, CCPM has better properties in terms of strength, deformation, impact toughness and energy absorption. Those advantages are more obvious with high strain rate. Therefore, CCPM has more vast application prospects in civil defense projects than EPSC.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".