Assessment of sulfate resistance in fresh-to-fresh hybrid systems: a comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composite systems (CSs) incorporating various concrete types have been introduced to enhance the performance of conventional concretes, while optimising the economic applicability of modern concretes. Systems consisting of layers of high-performance fibre-reinforced concrete (HPFRC) in tension combined with compressive self-consolidating concrete (SCC) layers were evaluated in a severe sulfate environment. A variety of HPFRC materials were utilised, including ultrahigh-performance fibre-reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) and engineered cementitious composites reinforced with steel and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fibres. The samples were cyclically exposed to a concentrated sodium sulfate solution and physicomechanical changes and microstructural variations in the bonded layers, particularly the interfacial properties, were evaluated at 90 and 180 days. Exposed CSs were examined for visual appearance, mass gain, flexural and compressive strength, and tensile bond strength. Compared with monolithic SCC, CSs demonstrated superior chemical resistance under prolonged exposure to an extreme sulfate environment. Based on scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, the UHPFRC-based system demonstrated higher resistance to deterioration. Interfacial fibres had a varying effect, with PVA fibres showing slightly better residual retention. Interfacial zones of CSs were also affected by high concentrations of reaction products from SCC, although the effects were less pronounced for UHPFRC layers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".