MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926276526 · doi:10.11159/icsect19.127

Bond Behavior of Fabric-Reinforced Geopolymeric Matrix System – A Pilot Study

2019· article· en· W2926276526 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Feras Abu Obaida, Tamer El‐Maaddawy, Hilal El-Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUnited Arab Emirates University
KeywordsComposite materialMaterials scienceMatrix (chemical analysis)Bond

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents results of a pilot study carried out to investigate the feasibility and viability of producing a sustainable and eco-friendly structural strengthening solution involving the use of cement-free alkali-activated geopolymeric matrix and carbon fabric textiles.The study focused on examining the bond behavior at the fabric-geopolymeric matrix interface through single-lap shear tests.The geopolymeric matrix was a blend of fly ash/ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) activated by an alkaline solution of sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide.Test parameters included the bonded length, configuration of the textile fabrics, and composition of the matrix.The bond behavior of the specimens with a geopolymeric matrix was characterized and compared to that of similar specimens with a cementitious matrix.All specimen exhibited a debonding mode of failure at the fabric-matrix interface.The bond strength of a specimen with a bi-directional fabric was higher than that of a similar specimen with a unidirectional fabric.The bond strength of the specimens with the geopolymeric matrix was even higher than that of similar specimens with the cementitious matrix.Increasing the fly ash-to-GGBS ratio in the geopolymeric matrix slightly decreased the bond strength but improved the post-peak behavior of the tested specimens.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207