MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413424915 · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2025.108133

Beyond carbon: An integrated LCA–MCDA framework for circularity measurement of ordinary and geopolymer concrete

2025· article· en· W4413424915 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopolymerMultiple-criteria decision analysisGeopolymer cementCarbon fibersEnvironmental scienceWaste managementComputer scienceMathematicsEngineeringMathematical optimizationAlgorithmComposite numberFly ash

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, circular approaches to concrete production have gained increasing attention, yet comparative evaluations between different circular concrete types remain limited and inconsistent. In this context, previous comparative studies between circular ordinary concrete (COC) and circular geopolymer concrete (CGC) have been hindered by biases, including a narrow focus on carbon emissions, neglect of service life differences, and inconsistent compressive strength (CS) comparisons. This study presents a novel integrated framework that combines life cycle assessment (LCA), circular economy strategies, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to robustly evaluate the sustainability of COC and CGC across six CS ranges. The case study is based in Tehran, reflecting local material availability, environmental conditions, and priorities, influencing mixture designs and MCDA weightings. This underscores the necessity of region-specific approaches in sustainability assessments. Accordingly, circular mixtures were optimized using response surface methodology (RSM), service life was incorporated via the fib model, and a cradle-to-cradle LCA was performed. MCDA, informed by local expert opinions, prioritized environmental indicators. Results demonstrate that CGC consistently outperforms COC across all examined CS ranges (23–41 MPa), with its sustainability performance improving at higher CS. This advantage is attributed to CGC's lower sensitivity to CS-related environmental burdens and substantially longer service life. Moreover, circularity metrics confirm the benefits of circular designs over linear alternatives, with resource inflow circularity rates of approximately 88 % for COC and 71 % for CGC. This research provides a comprehensive decision-making tool by emphasizing the need for holistic and context-specific assessments to advance circularity in the concrete construction industry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.309 · 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