MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320900824 · doi:10.14359/51738493

Predicting Fracture from Thermodynamic Modeling of Cementitious Systems

2023· article· en· W4320900824 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yan Wang, K. K. Bharadwaj, Hadi S. Esmaeeli, Pablo Zavattieri, O. Burkan Isgor, Jason Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueACI Materials Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdvanced Research Projects Agency - EnergyOregon State UniversityU.S. Department of EnergyFederal Highway AdministrationDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationAdvanced Research Projects AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeographySierra leoneEnvironmental protectionAncient historyEthnologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an approach to predict the mechanical and fracture behavior of cement-based systems by combining thermodynamic and finite element analysis models. First, the reaction products in a hydrated cementitious paste are predicted using a thermodynamic model. Second, a pore partitioning model is used to segment the total porosity into porosity associated with gel pores and capillary pores. A property-porosity relationship is used to predict the elastic modulus, tensile strength, and fracture energy of the hardened cement paste. The paste's modulus, fracture energy, and tensile strength, along with information on the aggregate properties and interfacial transition zone properties, are used as inputs to a finite element analysis model to predict the flexural strength and fracture response of mortars.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACI Materials JournalSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207