MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212770407 · doi:10.28991/cej-2021-03091768

A Case Study on The Mechanical and Durability Properties of a Concrete Using Recycled Aggregates

2021· article· en· W3212770407 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil Engineering Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDurabilityCompressive strengthAggregate (composite)PorosityMaterials scienceCompression (physics)Geotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Morocco, Recycled Aggregate Concrete (RAC) is not promoted unlike developed countries like France, Canada, US and many others. This article aims to present a Moroccan study related to the characterization of RAC and compare it with several studies all over the world. It focuses on compressive strength as the main mechanical characteristic and the porosity as the physical property that affects durability. The protocol is based on crushing concrete from demolished building and producing aggregates that are used in making experimental samples of RAC with different percentages of replacing Natural Aggregates (NA) by recycled ones. The first part of experimental study is to determine compressive strength of these samples after 7, 21, 28 and 90 days of confectioning it. Test results prove that above 25% of replacement level, the compression drops considerably and the Recycled Aggregates (RA) can’t replace the naturel ones. The second part of studies focuses on studying porosity as indicator of durability according to the performance approach. It concludes that the RAC may be used in a construction with a required life of 100 years specially building and roads. For high standards constructions or construction in a specific environment, more studies should be done. Doi: 10.28991/cej-2021-03091768 Full Text: PDF

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.182 · 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