Effect of Air Entrainment on Cemented Mine Backfill Properties: Analysis Based on Response Surface Methodology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of an extensive research program exploring the potential benefits of using air-entraining admixtures in mine backfill, the experimental study presented in this paper investigates the effect of cement and entrained air dosages on mine backfill unconfined compressive strength (UCS), fresh density, and dry density. Backfill specimens were prepared using silica sand, normal Portland cement, water, and an entrained air admixture. An experimental design with response surface methodology was adopted to develop predictive mathematical models and analyze the results. The results demonstrated that an entrained air dosage of 3.5% could improve the UCS of the mine backfill owing to better dispersion of cement particles. However, a further increase in the dosage reduced the UCS as well as the fresh and dry densities by approximately 200 and 120 kg/m3, respectively. Study results imply that using air-entraining admixtures can potentially enhance mine backfill flowability and reduce the density, thus providing safer and more sustainable working conditions in an underground mining environment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".