Estudio geotécnico de arenas de Ottawa y ensayos de mejora con biocalcificación
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este proyecto trata sobre el interés que ofrece la biocalcificación en cuanto a la mejora de las propiedades mecánicas de materiales de construcción. En concreto este proyecto se desarrolla con arenas de Ottawa con intención de extrapolar resultados y de continuar con ensayos en distintos materiales. Se realizan ensayos de caracterización del material en primer lugar para conocer sus propiedades básicas y posteriormente se preparan los cultivos bacteriológicos que ayuden a biocalcificar el medio de estudio. Tras las correspondientes investigaciones y pruebas respecto al método más efectivo, cantidad de inyecciones, duración… usando también conocimientos químicos para la preparación de los reactivos, se procede a la repetición de los ensayos para ver la variación en las propiedades y poder sacar conclusiones útiles en la mejora visible de éstas. ABSTRACT This project discuss the interest of biocalcification offered by regarding the improvement of the mechanical properties of construction materials. Specifically this project is developed with Ottawa sands intending to extrapolate findings and to continue testing different materials. Firstly, characterization tests are performed to find out its basic material properties and after that, bacterial cultures are prepared to help studying how to biocalcify the sample. After the needed investigations and tests looking for the most effective method, accurate number of injections, desired duration ... also using chemical knowledge for the preparation of the reagents; we proceed to retest the samples to see the variation in properties and be able to get useful conclusions of a visible improvement of these properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".