MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954322764 · doi:10.1016/j.cscm.2019.e00268

A critical review on application of alkali activated slag as a sustainable composite binder

2019· review· en· W2954322764 on OpenAlexaff
Paul O. Awoyera, Adeyemi Adesina

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Studies in Construction Materials · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShrinkagePortland cementMaterials scienceSlag (welding)Compressive strengthMicrostructureCommercializationComposite numberMetallurgyWaste managementComposite materialCementEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A state-of-the-art review of advances in alkali activated slag (AAS) with respect to its behaviour is presented. The need for sustainable development of AAS, and factors that affect the fresh and hardened properties of AAS based composites were discussed. The fresh properties of AAS reviewed include flow, setting times and heat of hydration. While the hardened properties considered were compressive strength, shrinkage, and microstructure. Major limitation of using AAS and possible solutions were also highlighted. Overall, various studies showed that large scale application and commercialization of AAS is imminent in the coming years, as AAS is capable of exhibiting similar/higher properties compared to that of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). In addition, the viewpoint of this review will be useful for contractors and researchers to have more understanding about AAS. Grey areas for possible research exploit were also identified.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations219
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Studies in Construction MaterialsSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207