Impact of bacterial admixtures on the compressive and tensile strengths, permeability, and pore structure of ternary mortars: Comparative study of ureolytic and phototrophic bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The addition of bacterial biomass to cementitious materials can improve strength and permeability properties by altering the pore structure. Photoautotrophic bacteria are understudied mortar bio-additives that do not produce unwanted by-products compared to commonly studied ureolytic species. This study directly compares the impact of the addition of heterotrophic Bacillus subtilis to photoautotrophic Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 on mortar properties and microstructure. Cellulose fibers were used as a bacteria carrier. A commercial concrete healing agent composed of dormant bacterial spores was also tested. Strength, water absorption tests, mercury intrusion porosimetry, differential scanning calorimetry, thermogravimetric analysis, and scanning electron microscopy were applied to experimental mortar properties. The photoautotrophic modifications had a stronger positive impact on mortar strength and permeability properties than sporulated heterotrophic modifications due to differences in surface properties and production of exopolysaccharides. The findings provide support for photoautotrophic species as additives for mortars to move away from ammonia-generating species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".