Characterization of High Strength Concrete‐Like Glass Ceramics Developed Using Borosilicate Waste Glass and Silicon Carbide
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
ABSTRACT Concrete‐like materials like glasscrete, woodcrete, hempcrete, and ashcrete present alternatives to traditional concrete used for building materials. This study focused on characterizing concrete‐like glass ceramics to determine its strength for applications where compressive stress and other harsh factors are prevalent. Glass ceramics was developed by combining borosilicate waste glass obtained from laboratory ware with silicon carbide. Which was processed, analyzed, and mixed in three different percentage variation: 60:40, 70:30, and 90:10. The mixed batches were compacted into shapes of tiles and fired at 900°C and the glass ceramics were analyzed by X‐ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy and property test like compression strength and water absorption were carried out. The resultant glass ceramics indicated a major presence of mullite crystalline phase and a glassy phase, also the property tests showed that the glass ceramics produced exhibit better properties than materials like traditional concrete used for building applications like pavements.
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