Effect of Marble Dust Powder on the Properties of Fresh and Hard Concrete
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal is to investigate the potential for employing byproducts from various industrial processes in the creation of ground-breaking mortar and concrete. The dust produced during the marble-cutting operation is put to good use. Different percentages of this garbage were recommended to be used in conjunction with or in place of cement in the making of concrete. The research looked into the possibility of using marble dust, which is produced during the shaping of marble blocks, as a cementitious material in concrete. In areas where they are readily available and can reduce construction costs, the study found that dust from marble slabs could be employed as a cementitious material in concrete mixtures. The discarded marble dust is mixed with cement in proportions of 5, 10, 15, and 20% of the standard concrete mix. Both the fresh and hardened characteristics of the produced combinations were investigated. Compressive and tensile strengths were measured after being cured for varying periods of time, both when marble dust was used as a partial replacement and when it was not.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".