INTEGRATING E-LEARNING IN METAVERSE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout the years, mining activity has had great importance for economic progress, despite its repercussions of generating significant amounts of waste, impacting sustainability and environmental conservation.The present study aimed to investigate the feasibility of using slate waste in ceramic processing, specifically through slip-casting techniques.By conducting detailed experimental procedures and characterization tests, the study seeks to provide insights into the suitability of slate waste as a substitute for conventional raw materials.Additionally, the study aimed to evaluate the technical properties and performance of ceramic pieces produced using slate waste, thereby addressing concerns about the quality and applicability of such materials in practical applications.Slate rejects collected from quarries were characterized and ceramic pieces were produced by slip casting.The cast green and sintered samples were characterized by density, pore size distribution by mercury porosity, surface area evaluation, X-ray diffraction techniques, and scanning electron microscopy.The X-ray results, when confronted with thermal analyses, have shown major structural transitions at approximately 550ºC and 850ºC.The studies of porosity and density of pieces, before and after heat treatment, provided a better understanding of the slate sintering Engineering in perspective: Science, technology and innovation Chapter 1 2 process.The results indicate that the density decreases after heat treatment and the pieces show a volume reduction due to slate reactions.Compacts formed by slip-casting different suspensions showed an average pore size of approximately 0.72 mm, suggesting that the structural changes that occurred in the slate greatly influenced the porosities and densities of the resulting materials.The results allow us to infer that slate powder from rejects has a great potential for being recovered, recycled, and applied in ceramic processing, producing various ceramic products.These products encompass a wide range of applications, including but not limited to sanitary ware, decorative pieces, and architectural elements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.037 | 0.015 |
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".