Evaluation of the Alkali–Silica Reaction Potential of Korean Aggregates: Experimental Insights and Mitigation Strategies for Concrete Durability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The alkali-silica reaction (ASR) is an important mechanism of concrete deterioration, whereby reactive silica in aggregate interacts with cement alkalis to form expanding gel, which compromises the structural integrity of the concrete. Although the Republic of Korea has historically been classified as a low-risk region for ASR due to its geological stability, documented examples of concrete damage since the late 1990s have necessitated a rigorous reassessment of local aggregates. This study evaluated the ASR potential of 84 aggregate samples sourced from diverse Korean geological regions using standardized protocols, including ASTM C 1260 for mortar bar expansion and ASTM C 289 for chemical reactivity, supplemented by soundness, acid drainage, and weathering index analyses. The results indicate expansion within the range of 0.1-0.2%, classified as potentially deleterious, for some rock types. In addition to ASR reactivity, isolated high anomalies (e.g., high soundness, acid producing, and weathering) suggest the existence of other durability risks. Consequently, while Korean aggregates predominantly have a low ASR reactivity, the adoption of various validated ASR tests as a routine test and the integration of supplementary cementitious materials are recommended to ensure long-term concrete durability, highlighting the need for sustained monitoring and further investigation into mitigation strategies.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".