MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393322766 · doi:10.23977/jemm.2024.090106

Study on Mechanical Properties of Concrete at Different Ages under Freeze-Thaw Cycles in Plateau

2024· article· en· W4393322766 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qi Zhao, Yamei Zang, Shixin Liang, Dongchen Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and Machinery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeomechanics and Mining Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPlateau (mathematics)Materials scienceComposite materialGeotechnical engineeringGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to explore the mechanical properties of concrete at different curing ages after freeze-thaw cycles in most areas of the plateau where freeze-thaw cycles exist. By comparing the compressive strength and splitting strength of concrete at different curing ages after different freeze-thaw cycles, the influence of curing age changes on the mechanical properties of concrete after freeze-thaw damage was analysed. The results show that the compressive strength and splitting strength of concrete can be significantly increased by increasing the curing days of concrete with the same number of freeze-thaw cycles, and sufficient curing age has a significant effect on reducing the influence of freeze-thaw cycles. Under the condition of the same curing days, with the increase of the number of freeze-thaw cycles, the compressive strength of concrete will first increase and strengthen at 50 cycles, and then start to weaken continuously. The splitting strength will continue to decrease with the increase of freeze-thaw cycles.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Mechanics and MachinerySame topicGeomechanics and Mining EngineeringFrench-language works237,207