A case study for exploring the alkali-aggregate reactivity of Cyprus aggregates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concrete is the most commonly used construction material in Cyprus Island as it is all around the world. Even though thousands of tons of concrete are manufactured in both North and South Cyprus, the alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR) of the crushed (quarried) aggregates has not been previously investigated in a systematic way. The lack of information on the AAR likelihood of Cyprus aggregates in the related literature has caused a lack of awareness about this durability problem in the island and hence, sufficient controls for taking necessary levels of precautions could not be made over the past decades. Two aggregate samples from North Cyprus and another type of aggregates from South Cyprus were obtained from active quarries and tested within this case study for the first time with RILEM tests in order to verify the likelihood of both alkali-silica and alkali-carbonate reactivities of Cyprus Aggregates. The results obtained from RILEM tests and the supplementary SEM analysis showed that both the North (limestone) and South (diabase) Cyprus aggregates exhibit significant levels of alkali-silica reactivity when they are used with composite cement, which is commonly preferred for its advantages. Results also indicated that the mortar batch including the second type of North Cyprus aggregates (dolomitic limestone) with the mentioned cement is potentially reactive for alkali-carbonate reaction as well. The experimental information provided for the first time with this case study is critical both for further Cyprus durability research studies to be carried out and also for improving the quality of local construction activities.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".