MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023025355 · doi:10.5006/c2013-02448

Numerical Evaluation of Galvanized Steel Corrosion in Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls

2013· article· en· W3023025355 on OpenAlexaff
Pouria Ghods, Victor Padilla, Akram Alfantazi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalvanizationMaterials scienceCorrosionMetallurgyEarth (classical element)Mechanically stabilized earthComposite materialLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Galvanized steel is generally used in mechanically stabilized walls to reinforce the soil due to its high corrosion resistance compared to carbon steel and also its cost effectiveness compared to stainless steel. With galvanized steel reinforcement, steel is protected against corrosion by a thin layer of zinc with a thickness of 20-80 μm. The corrosion of galvanized steel in soil consists of three stages. In the first stage of corrosion, the zinc layer dissolves into soil pore solution. When the underlying steel is exposed to the soil environment in the second stage of corrosion, a galvanic corrosion cell forms between the zinc and steel that limits the corrosion of the steel. The carbon steel reinforcement starts corroding after the depletion of the zinc layer in the last stage of corrosion. In this work, the three stages of galvanized steel corrosion were modeled using the finite element method and a numerical study was conducted to determine the corrosion rate of galvanized steel in soil exposed to corrosive environments. The effect of soil resistivity and oxygen concentration on the corrosion performance of galvanized steel and the effect of zinc thickness on the service life of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls were studied.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207