MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406439000 · doi:10.3390/ma18020406

The Effect of Relative Humidity on Creep Behavior of Cement Paste Microprism

2025· article· en· W4406439000 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhao Chen, Mahdiar Dargahi, Luca Sorelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Properties and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCreepMaterials scienceCementMicrostructureComposite materialMicroscale chemistryRelative humidityThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite decades of extensive studies, the mechanism of concrete creep remains a subject of debate, mainly due to the complex nature of cement microstructure. This complexity is further amplified by the interplay between water and the cement microstructure. The present study aimed to better understand the creep mechanism through creep tests on microprisms of cement paste at hygral equilibrium. First, microprisms with dimensions of 150 mm × 150 mm × 300 mm were prepared by precision cutting from a cement paste specimen with a water-to-cement ratio of 0.4. Subsequently, uniaxial compression and creep tests were carried out on these microprisms in a chamber with controlled relative humidity (RH). To mitigate the impact of plasticity and damage, the applied peak load was set to generate a stress level that was approximately 40% of the compressive strength. Moreover, an analytical coefficient φ was formulated to account for the foundation effect on microprism creep, agreeing with the numerical analysis employing the finite element method. Our findings showed that the microscale creep compliance varied when the RH level was changed from 90% to 11%. Furthermore, logarithmic and power-law models were both applied to simulate creep curves. Lastly, the modeled creep behaviors were compared with those obtained by microindentation experiments in previous studies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicConcrete Properties and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207