MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Splitting Tensile Strength of Fiber-Reinforced and Biocemented Sand

2019· article· en· W2949070781 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Sun-Gyu Choi, Tung Hoang, E. James Alleman, Jian Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials in Civil Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Applications in Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIowa State UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceFiberComposite materialCalcium carbonateCompressive strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This technical note examines the splitting tensile strength properties of natural sand treated with polyvinyl acetate (PVA) fiber in combination with biocementation using the microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP) process. Ottawa 20-30 sand was mixed with PVA fiber at five different fiber ratios (0.0%, 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.6%, and 0.8% by weight) and then stabilized using urease-producing bacteria plus urea and calcium chloride (CaCl2) solutions. Splitting tensile strength was determined for the treated sand samples. The results showed that the splitting tensile strength and splitting secant elastic modulus increased with increasing in either calcium carbonate content or fiber ratio. The use of PVA fibers together with MICP treatment could also increase the failure strain and the postfailure splitting tensile 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 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials in Civil EngineeringSame topicMicrobial Applications in Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207