Reactivity of modified iron silicate slag as sustainable alternative binder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A possible solution to decrease the CO2 footprint caused by the cement industry and to enhance the transition to circular economy is to use slags as Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCM).The study presented here focuses on valorizing and investigating the reactivity and mechanical properties of blended binder systems combining Modified Iron Silicate (MFS) slag and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC).MFS slag is a fumed by-product synthesized during the production of Copper (Cu) metal.This slag can be used as possible alternative SCM due to its pozzolanic behaviour.To study the replacement level in relation to reactivity and strength development, replacement levels of 15, 30 and 50 wt% of MFS-slag in ordinary portland cement are analyzed.The work can be divided into two categories: 1) assessing the reactivity through thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and 2) evaluating the compressive strength (as a function of time) of mortar with MFS-slag after 2, 7, 28 and 90 days.TGA at 7, 15, 28 and 90 days allows to determine the reduction of portlandite content which gives an indication on the pozzolanic reactivity.Reactivity of MFS-slag blended systems is also determined relative to inert filler blended systems to discern between the reactive behavior of the MFS-slag and the filler effect.
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".