Durability Evaluation of Green-Engineered Cementitious Composite Incorporating Glass as Aggregate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid awareness about sustainability have ensued in recent times, and there has been a remarkable advancement by the construction industry to incorporate different waste materials into cementitious composites. Recent studies by the authors showed that recycled glass (GL) in the form of beads used as aggregate in engineered cementitious composites (ECC) is beneficial to its mechanical properties. However, with different durability issues related to the use of glass in cementitious composites, evaluating the durability properties of ECC mixtures incorporating glass as aggregate is paramount. Therefore, this study was carried out to evaluate the properties of cementitious composites related to its performance in various environments. The permeability response alongside the resistance to alkali-silica reaction (ASR) of different ECC mixtures incorporating different proportions of GL was evaluated. In addition, microstructural observations were made to understand the microstructural properties of the mixtures evaluated. The results from this study show that the use of glass as aggregates in ECC enhanced the durability properties of the composites.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".