MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401440744 · doi:10.1080/21650373.2024.2374830

Use of fresh properties to predict mechanical properties of sustainable concrete incorporating recycled concrete aggregate

2024· article· en· W4401440744 on OpenAlexaff
Samer Al Martini, Reem Sabouni, Ahmad Khartabil, Tadesse G. Wakjira, M. Shahria Alam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Cement-Based Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggregate (composite)Properties of concreteMaterials scienceComposite materialCompressive strengthGeotechnical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) is not widely used in construction because of the concerns related to its quality. This paper investigates the effect of the replacement levels of recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) on bulk and hardened densities of RAC. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to investigate the sensitivity of bulk and hardened densities of concrete to the replacement level of RCA. Predictive equations were developed to estimate the 3-day, 7-day, and 28-day compressive strength of RAC from its fresh properties, which are helpful for early quality control inspection of RAC. Furthermore, a predictive equation has been proposed to determine the flexural strength of RAC based on its 28-day compressive strength. The comparison of the predictive capability of the proposed and widely used code equations showed the incapability of the latter to estimate the flexural strength of RAC. In contrast, the proposed equation demonstrated a high level of prediction accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Cement-Based MaterialsSame topicRecycled Aggregate Concrete PerformanceFrench-language works237,207