Experimental Study on the Substitution of Waste Rubber Tyre Ash with Natural Sand in the Cement Concrete
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 importance of using recycled materials like rubber in construction materials is rising rapidly today. By incorporating used rubber into cement and mortar, we can save landfill space and reduce our dependence on natural resources. Rubber scrap can be mixed in as either fine or coarse aggregate. Add it to Portland cement for a stronger, more durable product (PC). This paper reviews the studies conducted so far on the feasibility of using waste rubber in place of conventional PC-based mortar and concrete’s natural fine aggregate. The strength and water-absorption capacity of materials made from ash from scrap rubber tyres were measured. Test results indicate that waste rubber ash was substitute with natural sand up 10% then strengths of the sample were enhanced after increasing the content of waste rubber tyre ash then strength was decreased. Water absorption capacity of samples was improved as increased the content of waste rubber tyre ash into concrete mix.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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