MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7108202024 · doi:10.6000/1929-5995.2025.14.20

Improving Mechanical Properties of Polymer Modified Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete Made with Concrete Waste by usingPC-600-Super-Plasticizer

2025· article· en· W7108202024 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative concrete reinforcement materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemolition wasteDemolitionUltimate tensile strengthFlexural strengthCompressive strengthSuperplasticizerAggregate (composite)StiffnessProperties of concrete

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the enhancement of mechanical properties in polymer-modified steel fiber-reinforced concrete (PMSFRC) incorporating demolition waste as a sustainable coarse aggregate replacement. The work addresses the dual objectives of resource recycling and performance optimization within environmentally responsible construction practices. Results show that replacing natural coarse aggregates with demolition waste slightly reduces compressive strength from 44.1 MPa to 41.6 MPa. However, the incorporation of PC-600 Flocrete superplasticizer effectively compensates for this reduction, increasing compressive strength to 49.4 MPa. Significant improvements were also observed in tensile strength, which increased from 5.7 MPa to 6.1 MPa, and in flexural strength, which increased from 12.1 MPa to 15.5 MPa for mixes with 100% waste replacement. Additionally, the modulus of elasticity improved from 26.5 GPa to 30.5 GPa, demonstrating enhanced stiffness and structural viability. These findings confirm that polymer modification enables effective utilization of concrete waste without compromising structural integrity, promoting cleaner production, circular material use, and sustainable innovation in civil infrastructure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer ScienceSame topicInnovative concrete reinforcement materialsFrench-language works237,207