MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392246764 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2024.110256

Self-consolidating concrete: Dataset on mixture design and key properties

2024· article· en· W4392246764 on OpenAlexaff
Amine el Mahdi Safhi

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Data scienceField (mathematics)Resource (disambiguation)Process (computing)ConversationRedundancy (engineering)Key (lock)Artificial intelligenceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This manuscript delineates the assembly and structure of an extensive dataset encompassing more than 2500 self-consolidating concrete (SCC) mixtures, meticulously compiled from 176 scholarly sources. The dataset has been subjected to a thorough curation process to eliminate feature redundancy, rectify transcriptional inaccuracies, and excise duplicative entries. This refinement process has culminated in a dataset primed for advanced data-driven inquiries within the SCC research domain, marking a novel contribution to the field. The dataset serves as a robust foundational resource, poised for subsequent augmentations and stringent applications in data-centric studies. It facilitates a detailed characterization of SCC properties, potentially through the implementation of machine learning algorithms, or serves as a comparative benchmark to assess the performance across diverse SCC formulations. In conclusion, the dataset serves as a crucial resource for scholars engaged in studying SCC and similar substances. It offers deep insights into the ecological benefits of substituting conventional Portland concrete with SCC alternatives. This compilation not only advances the understanding of SCC properties but also contributes to the broader conversation about sustainable construction practices.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207