MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392506312 · doi:10.1061/9780784485330.020

Bio-Cementation via Microbially Induced Calcium Carbonate Precipitation for Surface Applications: The Effects of Sand Particle Size on Uniformity and Strength

2024· article· en· W4392506312 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabine Olds, Hudson Dorian, Adrienne Philips, Mohammed J. Khosravi, Catherine M. Kirkland, Alfred B. Cunningham, Lauren Arbaugh, Randy Hiebert

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Applications in Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCementation (geology)Particle sizePrecipitationCalcium carbonateCarbonateMaterials scienceGrain sizeMetallurgyComposite materialGeologyCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of biological methods to improve the mechanical characteristics of geomaterials has gained popularity recently. The utilization of the enzyme “urease,” when produced by a microbe, which causes the breakdown of urea and leads to the precipitation of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) when mixed with calcium, is known as microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation (MICP). MICP is a promising approach for surface soil strengthening. Previous studies have shown that finer soil contents can affect the uniformity of bio-cementation distribution through the soil sample, and thus its strength properties. The objective of this study was to analyze bio-cementation via MICP in various sand mediums, ranging from coarse to fine particle size and ranging from uniformly to well-graded. Sakrete medium commercial sand, Ottawa sand, and silica silt were used at different percentages to produce samples for treatment. Results conclude that well-graded sand compositions created stronger, more brittle samples than compared to poor-graded compositions and larger particle sand sizes. Additional testing needs to be done on finer sand particles as well as current sands to verify previous results before further testing can be done on varying soil compositions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial Applications in Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207