Recycling of Mine Wastes in the Concrete Industry: A Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mining industry generates a substantial amount of waste materials, including tailings and waste rocks, which, if not managed correctly, pose threats to the environment and public health due to their long-term accumulation and disposal. Simultaneously, the construction sector consumes important amounts of natural resources like water and rocks. However, research shows that inert mining waste can serve as a substitute for conventional raw materials in construction, particularly in concrete. This review focuses on using mining waste as an alternative to concrete technology to promote cleaner practices in construction and circular economy in mining. Mining waste, with its physical characteristics and chemical composition, can function as diverse components in concrete, such as sand, aggregates, and binders. This article assesses these properties and explores their incorporation into concrete production, aiming to stimulate further research and development, foster environmentally responsible approaches, and underline the direct link to reaching SDGs to achieve sustainability in the construction industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it