MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412754883 · doi:10.11159/iccste25.102

Development of one part, Self-Cured, Fine Soil/ Quartz Stone Powder Based Geopolymer Mortar

2025· article· en· W4412754883 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arass Omer Mawlod, Aram Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMortarQuartzGeopolymerMaterials scienceGeopolymer cementMetallurgyComposite materialCompressive strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the critical challenges in the practical application of geopolymers lies in the necessity of heat treatment to enhance their properties.Consequently, the development of self-curing geopolymers has emerged as a focal area of research.In this study, fine soil was utilized as the primary raw material.Two series of mixes were prepared: in the first series, without (%0) Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) replacement, fine soil was replaced by quartz stone powder at varying proportions (0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, and 100%).In the second series, with a 10% OPC replacement, fine soil was replaced by quartz stone powder in increments of 0%, 15%, 35%, 55%, 75%, and 90%.Key properties such as compressive strength, water absorption, and sorptivity were investigated.The results revealed that the mix with 10% OPC replacement achieved better the geopolymer properties.Furthermore, in both series, increasing the quartz stone powder content consistently improved the mortar performance.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation EngineeringSame topicGrouting, Rheology, and Soil MechanicsFrench-language works237,207