A Contribution to Understanding Damage Generated and Propagated by the AAR Reactive Aggregate from Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It remains unclear in the literature what is the cause of the so-called alkali-carbonate reaction (ACR) damage to concrete yet, a consensus is reached when considering dedolimitization as non-expansive. However, expansion and cracks as distress features are often attributed to alkali-silica reaction (ASR) when evidence of a reactive mineral is found in the aggregate. Evidently, different types of aggregates may produce different types and degrees of damage. Therefore, this work aims to assess the damage to concrete generated and propagated by the so-called ACR susceptible reactive Kingston coarse aggregate through mechanical testing (i.e., direct shear test), microscopy (the damage rating index – DRI), and other techniques. Distinct induced expansion levels (i.e., 0%, 0.05%, 0.12%, and 0.20%) were selected to compare the distress caused by ACR to concrete affected by ASR. Result show that the behaviour of ACR, namely as captured through the DRI, is inconsistent with that of ASR thus attesting to ACR being a distinct distress mechanism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".