Portland cement stabilisation of Canadian mature fine oil sands tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mature fine tailings (MFT) are waste suspended in large on-site ponds after bitumen extraction from oil sands. This study investigated the effectiveness of Portland cement binders on the stabilisation of MFT. Laboratory tests were performed to investigate the effects of the curing period (7, 14 and 28 d) and cement dosages (1, 5, 10 and 15 wt%) on the geotechnical properties of MFT, including solid contents (water contents), undrained shear strength and Atterberg limits. The results indicate an increase in all these properties of MFT with cement dosages. The increase in the solid content of MFT is mainly attributed to cement hydration. The undrained shear strength of MFT mixed with 10 and 15% Portland cement increased to 7·65 and 15·5 kPa at 28 d curing, respectively, from virtually 0 kPa. The strength gain of the stabilised MFT is due to the internal formation of reticulate and fibrous structures, mainly calcium silicate hydrate gels, which is confirmed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images and X-ray diffractograms. SEM analysis also indicates that the aggregated nature of the MFT fabric is more significant with more cement addition. The results of this study provide much needed insights for potential applications of Portland cement in MFT stabilisation.
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".