Sorptivity, swelling, shrinkage, compression and durability of quarry dust treated soft soils for moisture bound pavement geotechnics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The failure of pavement foundation materials as hydraulically bound materials is a worrisome condition facing pavement infrastructures in the developing world. Capillary action leads to swelling and shrinkage, compressive strength and durability problems, which result from sorptivity as a function of hydraulic exposure conditions. Pavement infrastructures a constantly interfaced with rise and fall of ground water level and capillary action hence a study on the sorptivity behaviour of quarry dust (QD) treated soft clay soils was carried out. Preliminary tests were conducted on the test materials for the purpose of characterization. The basic test results show that the test soils S1, S2 and S3 were classified as A-2-7, A-2-6 and A-7 soil groups respectively according to AASHTO classification system. Also, they were classified as poorly graded soils but test soils S1 and S2 were observed to be of high clay content (CH) according to USCS. The test soils were equally observed to be of highly plasticity and contains high free swell index properties, hence are expansive. Sorptivity, swelling, shrinkage, compressive strength and durabikity tests were conducted on the test soils treated with varying proportions of quarry dust in accordance with the appropriate standards. Tests results show that QD addition improved consistently the swelling potential, shrinkage limits, compression and durability of the treated test soils. While the improvement on the sorptivity were in two phases, a nick point divided the early age and late age of the sorptivity behaviour curves. However, QD has proven to be a good additive in the treatment of test soils used as pavement foundation materials in a moisture bound environment.
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".