MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407311238 · doi:10.1002/ese3.1977

A Comprehensive Review of Sustainable Geopolymer Concrete Using Palm Oil Clinker: Environmental and Engineering Aspects

2025· review· en· W4407311238 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Khamees N. Abdulhaleem, Hussein M. Hamada, Ahmed I. Osman, Salim T. Yousif, Ali M. Humada, Ali Majdi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Science & Engineering · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsGeopolymer cementGeopolymerPalm oilEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPetroleum engineeringConstruction engineeringCivil engineeringWaste managementAgroforestryFly ash

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Amidst the dual challenges of aggregate scarcity and the environmental impact of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from cement production, this study investigates the viability of palm oil clinker (POC) as a sustainable aggregate in geopolymer concrete (GPC). The lack of appropriate alternative coarse and fine aggregates essential in concrete production is one of the critical issues faced by the construction industry. This review evaluates its environmental benefits, chemical and physical attributes, and influence on GPC's microstructure. Previous studies have shown that incorporating POC in GPC significantly reduces density from 2345 to 1821 kg/m3 while maintaining competitive compressive strength, thus proving its applicability in various structural and nonstructural contexts. Moreover, GPC with POC demonstrates enhanced resistance to aggressive environmental conditions such as water absorption and resistance against acid and sulfate environments. Geopolymer mortar (GPM) exposed to sulfate attack recorded the lowest decrease in strength than GPM containing POC fine aggregates by about 20%. The use of 100% POC aggregates in GPC mix has a 3.2% water absorption, which is lower than the limit for high‐performance concrete. The results advocate for the development of POC‐aggregate GPC as an environmentally friendly construction material, contributing to the sustainable advancement of the building industry.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Science & EngineeringSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207