Effect of Incinerator Fly Ash on the Properties of Slag-Based Geopolymer Mortar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the feasibility of incorporating incineration fly ash (IFA) into slag-based geopolymer mortar (GM) as an alternative sustainable method for IFA treatment.The influence of IFA content on the fresh and hardened properties of GM is examined, aiming to enhance waste utilization while mitigating environmental concerns.A blend of slag and IFA was employed as the aluminosilicate binder and activated using a sodium-based alkaline activator solution.Based on the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) results, the raw IFA can be classified as a non-hazardous material.Additionally, flow test results indicated that increasing IFA content negatively affected the workability of GM, with a flow reduction of up to 37% observed when 50% IFA was used.Similarly, the incorporation of 50% IFA adversely impacted compressive strength at all curing ages, leading to reductions of 41, 73, and 75% at 1, 7, and 28 days, respectively.Despite these reductions, all mixes met the standard requirements for masonry cement, rendering them suitable for various masonry applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".