MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293074039 · doi:10.11159/iccste22.189

Preliminary Study on the Effect of Adding Palm Tree Fronds toConcrete

2022· article· en· W4293074039 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rana Ezzdine Lakys, Mohammad Hany Yassin, Zein-Eddine Merouani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConstruction Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences
KeywordsFrondPalmTree (set theory)Computer scienceMathematicsBotanyBiologyCombinatoricsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agriculture waste can be used in construction as an alternative to non-environmentally friendly components.Every year, a considerable amount of this waste is thrown without any recycling.In addition to its good tensile properties, natural fibers such as the ones extracted from palm tree fronds (PTF), can be used to enhance the thermal properties of concrete.The consistent increase in the planet temperature, increases the demands for AC usage and electricity consumption.This implies more CO2 emissions and consequently more temperature rise.In this study, the concept of using this free natural waste in construction has been investigated.This paper is concerned with the use of PTF with concrete as a composite material.The tests that have been carried out on the PTF concrete (PTFC) are focused on the strength and durability of the composite material.Four PTFC mixes where prepared and casted into cylindrical molds for tests at several curing ages.The results indicate some improvement in the thermal resistance of concrete on the cost of its mechanical properties.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation EngineeringSame topicConstruction Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207