Effect of Treatment with Different Classes of Cement on the Geotechnical Properties of Soils: Case Study of Red Soil in the M'sila Region, Algeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article showcases the findings of an experimental study conducted on a red siltclayey taken from the site of Chaaba Elhamra (M'sila region, Algeria) for the purpose of being used for the building of road embankments and pavement layers.This experimental research aims to evaluate the geotechnical characteristics of this red soil, both before and after being treated with two classes of cement (CEM-II/B-L 32.5 N and CEM-II/B-L 42.5 N), and to analyse the impact of the cement class on its geotechnical properties.The experimental program included identification tests as well as Proctor compaction, CBR, and unconfined compression tests.The interpretation of the results has taken into account knowledge acquired from the literature.The findings showed that the percentage of cement had a beneficial effect on the geotechnical characteristics of this red silt-clay.Moreover, they highlighted that the type of cement did not have a great influence on the physical parameters, the compaction parameters, and the CBR indices.However, it was observed that class 42.5 cement had a much greater effect on UCS values than lower class 32.5 cement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".