MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396701019 · doi:10.11159/icsect24.169

Enhancement of Mechanical Properties of Concrete Using Industrial Waste

2024· article· en· W4396701019 on OpenAlex
Harshit Dubey, Anirudhsinh Yadav, Tirth Chaudhari, Naimish Bhatt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndustrial wasteWaste managementMaterials scienceConstruction engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the evolving global landscape, there is a growing inclination towards embracing sustainable and environmentally conscious construction practices to meet the demand for more eco-friendly and climate-resilient built environments.In recent time several SCM (Supplementary Cementitious Material) had been employed in concrete for its property enhancement as well as reducing negative impact of waste on environment.Taking a step in the similar direction the present study employs Rice husk ash (RHA) and Waste marble powder (WMP) for strength enhancement of concrete.Varying percentage of Rice Husk Ash (0%, 2.5%, 5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15%&20%) and Waste Marble Powder (0%,2.5%,5%,10%, 12.5%, 15% & 20%) were used as a replacement of cement in binder.Further a combined replacement of RHA and WMP was used to prepare data cases for replacement of cement in concrete.Five different cases were designed with keeping RHA percentage constant for single case while varying the WMP percentage for same.Case 0 with no replacement, Case 1 with 2.5% RHA along with varying percentage of WMP, Case 2 with 5% RHA along with varying percentage of WMP similarly Case 3 with 10% RHA along with varying percentage of WMP and Case 4 with 12.5% RHA along with varying percentage of WMP.The varied percentage of WMP were 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% for each case.This resulted in identification of combined effect of both materials on concrete strength

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.

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 score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.174 · 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