An Investigation into the Suitability of GGBS and OPC as Low Percentage Single-Component Binders for the Stabilisation and Solidification of Harbour Dredge Material Mildly Contaminated with Metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The occurrence of contaminated materials encountered during harbour dredging is becoming increasingly problematic for harbour and port authorities. The risks to human health, wildlife and port infrastructure of exposure to such contaminants necessitates the removal or containment of such risks. As with contaminated terrestrial sites the solidification and stabilization (S/S) of this material has been proven to be an effective alternative to disposing of contaminants off-site, typically via dumping at sea or in a landfill. Research, to date, on S/S has been focused on heavily contaminated sediments in large industrial ports. However, with tightening environmental regulations, the limits of acceptable contamination are generally decreasing. This means the number of port dredging projects requiring contaminant remediation is increasing. There is now a need to examine the effectiveness of S/S on harbour sites that are mildly contaminated from both an environmental and project feasibility viewpoint. To that end, this study examines the effectiveness of various S/S mix percentages of ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) in retarding the leaching of contaminants from a mildly contaminated harbour site.
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 | 0.001 | 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".