MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220828649 · doi:10.1063/5.0076320

Beyond the chloride threshold concept for predicting corrosion of steel in concrete

2022· article· en· W4220828649 on OpenAlexafffund
Ueli Angst, O. Burkan Isgor, C.M. Hansson, Alberto A. Sagüés, Mette Rika Geiker

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Reviews · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCorrosionChlorideReinforced concreteMoment (physics)CementMaterials scienceService lifeProcess (computing)Computer scienceMetallurgyComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All existing models to forecast the corrosion performance of reinforced concrete structures exposed to chloride environments are based on one common theoretical concept, namely, a chloride threshold, as a sharply defined trigger for corrosion, followed by a period of active corrosion. We critically review the resulting treatment of corrosion initiation and propagation as two distinct, successive stages. We conclude that this concept presents a major barrier for developing reliable corrosion forecast models, and that a new approach is needed. In reality, steel corrosion in concrete is a continuous process, that is, rarely separable into uncoupled, sequential phases. We propose that the focus be placed on the quantification of the time- and space-variant corrosion rate from the moment steel is placed in concrete until it reaches the end of the service life. To achieve this, a multi-scale and multi-disciplinary approach is required to combine the scientific and practical contributions from materials science, corrosion science, cement/concrete research, and structural engineering.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations125
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ReviewsSame topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207