MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414568352 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0154

Effect of ultrafine slag and metakaolin blend on the properties of high-strength dry-mix concrete for potential application in concrete masonry unit production

2025· article· en· W4414568352 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Saeid Ghasemalizadeh, Rahil Khoshnazar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovations in Concrete and Construction Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Masonry Design Centre
KeywordsMetakaolinCompressive strengthAggregate (composite)CementAbsorption of waterSlag (welding)Masonry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to develop a high-strength and low-Portland cement content dry-mix concrete with properties important for concrete block masonry unit manufacturing. First, the effect of six aggregate gradations on the compressive strength of dry-mix concretes made with a commercial Portland/Portland limestone cement was studied. Then, the aggregate that provided the highest strength was selected to prepare a dry-mix concrete that contained 50% of that cement together with an ultrafine granulated blast furnace slag (UFS) and a locally available medium-grade metakaolin (MK). Another binder that contained commercial slag combined with MK was also considered for comparison. The concretes were tested for the compressive strength, water absorption, permeable voids volume, bulk electrical resistivity, and freeze–thaw resistance. Results showed that the concrete incorporating MK–UFS achieved a 28-day compressive strength of ∼70 MPa, while that with MK–slag reached ∼56 MPa. The concrete with MK–UFS also exhibited reduced water absorption and improved freeze–thaw resistance.

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 score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInnovations in Concrete and Construction MaterialsFrench-language works237,207