MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413922730 · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2025.167935

Optimizing coal gasification slag utilization: Predictive modeling and hydration mechanism of blast furnace slag replacement in solid waste cementitious materials

2025· article· en· W4413922730 on OpenAlexaff
Haojing Ba, Jiajie Li, Wen Ni, Chen Lǚ, Michael Hitch

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
FundersKey Technologies Research and Development ProgramNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaHigher Education Discipline Innovation Project
KeywordsGround granulated blast-furnace slagBlast furnaceSlag (welding)CementitiousWaste managementMunicipal solid wasteMaterials scienceCoal gasificationCoalMetallurgyEnvironmental scienceCementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coal gasification slag (CGS), a by-product of the coal gasification process, is produced in large quantities but remains underutilized, posing environmental challenges. This study investigates the feasibility of partially substituting blast furnace slag (BFS) with CGS in the preparation of solid waste cementitious materials (SWCM), aiming to enhance resource utilization and reduce costs. A constrained mixing test design was employed to optimize the proportions of CGS, BFS, steel slag (SS), and desulphurization gypsum (DG), and a regression model was developed to predict compressive strength at 3, 7, and 28 days. The optimal mix (20 % CGS, 23 % BFS, 37 % SS, 20 % DG) achieved a 28-day compressive strength of 57.1 MPa, with the model demonstrating high predictive accuracy (Adj-R 2 up to 95.27 %). Microscopic analyzes (XRD, SEM-EDS, XPS, TG-DTG/DSC) revealed that CGS contributes abundant aluminosilicate glass, promoting the formation of C-(A)S-H gels and AFt, which enhance strength and densify the microstructure. The study confirms that CGS can effectively replace BFS in SWCM, providing a theoretical basis for large-scale, sustainable utilization of CGS in construction materials.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering JournalSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207