Experimental Investigation of Micronized Biomass Silica-Based Concrete as a Sustainable Construction Material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the potential of Micronized Biomass Silica (MBS), a high-silica agricultural byproduct, as a partial substitute for cement in concrete mixtures.MBS can lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions associated with cement production, contributing to more sustainable concrete practices.The study explores the effects of replacing cement with MBS in varying percentages, ranging from 3% to 12% at intervals of 3%, to identify the optimal mix combination.Concrete samples, both with and without the addition of Micronized Biomass Silica (MBS), were subjected to compressive strength and split tensile strength tests.The results indicate that incorporating up to 6% MBS enhances the strength of concrete, while higher percentages lead to a decrease in strength.Additionally, a detailed microstructural analysis of the concrete with MBS was performed using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), which provided insights into the mechanisms underlying the observed strength development.The optimal percentage of MBS for enhanced strength development is 6%, as it improves compressive and split tensile strength while enhancing the interfacial transition zone.The findings suggest that MBS can be effectively utilized to improve concrete performance at optimal replacement levels.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".