Opening Letter of RILEM TC UMW: Upcycling Powder Mineral Wastes into Cement Matrices — Challenges and Opportunities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cement and concrete industries are currently facing the urgent and arduous challenge of decarbonisation and material circularisation for improved resource efficiency. The pursuit of new raw materials and binders that will improve sustainability is urgent, especially as end-of-pipe carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies have not yet been scaled up economically even after five decades of research and large investments. On the other hand, society is facing the colossal issue of managing mineral wastes which are produced in several Gts per year globally, posing a massive environmental and societal liability. Many of these mineral wastes have elemental and mineralogical profiles that make them good candidates for use as clinker raw feed or supplementary cementitious materials. Although the published research on the topic is extensive, it is not organised, lacking a systematic comprehensive approach, making valorisation challenging. RILEM TC UMW was developed to address this gap and create a framework for realising the potential of upcycling mineral wastes focusing on using powders as either clinker raw feed or other binder applications while excluding discussion on calcined clays and mineral carbonation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it