MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413186121 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2024-0474

Concrete damage due to pyrrhotite in the Trois-Rivières area (Québec, Canada): risk of future damage to undamaged concrete

2025· article· en· W4413186121 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marc-André Bérubé, Charles Tremblay, F. Gagnon, Brodie Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPyrrhotiteForensic engineeringReinforced concreteGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologyStructural engineeringEngineeringMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 1700 buildings in the Trois-Rivières area (Québec, Canada), with the concrete manufactured with aggregates containing pyrrhotite have been inspected by the defense experts involved in a first trial. Nearly 500 of them, undamaged at the time of a first inspection, were reinspected about every 2 years. Only 23% of these (113/497) showed signs of concrete swelling due to internal sulfate attack with time, but only 8 did so more than 8 years after construction. Among the 384 still undamaged buildings, 99 were over 10 years old despite aggregate pyrrhotite contents of 0.25 to 1.00 vol%. The risk of future damage to undamaged concrete is based on three factors relating to: (1) aggregate pyrrhotite content, (2) type of concrete component and exposure conditions, climatic or other, and (3) age of concrete. Since 2017, the protocol has been applied to many buildings, and proved to be both reliable and conservative.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207