Viscosity-Enhanced EICP Treatment of Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glycerol and xanthan gum were employed to enhance the viscosity of the cementation solution in soil treated with enzyme-induced carbonate precipitation (EICP). The effect of increasing the viscosity of the solution was investigated because it may facilitate EICP treatment by retaining cementation solution as precipitation occurs. Columns 51 mm in diameter and 102 mm in height of Ottawa 20/30 and F-85 sands were treated with EICP solution containing no thickener, 50% (v/v) glycerol, and 0.25% (w/v) xanthan gum. Some columns had open bottom to allow drainage and some were capped to retain the cementation solution. Xanthan-enhanced EICP solution showed the highest level of fluid retention. Results showed that EICP-treated sand can be cemented with the addition of a viscosity enhancer but that cementation quality may be affected. The level of retention did not have a strong relationship with uniformity of cementation and did not result in enhanced unconfined compressive strength.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".