Deicer Scaling Resistance of Concrete Mixtures Containing Slag Cement Phase 3, January 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concern has been expressed about the deicer scaling resistance of concrete containing slag, especially when the dosage of slag exceeds \n50% of the total cementitious material in the mixture. Much of the concern appears to be based on the results of laboratory scaling tests \nbased on ASTM C 672, despite indications that such mixtures often perform well in the field. \nThe initial phase of this study showed that construction-related issues played a bigger role in the observed scaling performance than did \nthe amount of slag in the concrete mixture. The work also indicated that the test method (ASTM C 672) may be more severe than most \nenvironments. A second phase developed an alternative laboratory test method to ASTM C 672 that would better represent the field \nperformance of concretes, based on a method from the Canadian Quebec Ministry of Transportation. \nThe work described in this report was to repeat some tests using similar materials in a second laboratory to evaluate repeatability of the \ntest methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".