ArticlePolymers2025
Experimentally and Modeling Assessment of Parameters Affecting Grinding Aid-Containing Cement-PCE Compatibility: CRA, MARS and AOMA-ANN Methods.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Flow and Consistency Retention Performance in Cementitious Mixtures with Diverse Grinding Aid Dosages and Types.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Preparation, Structure and Characterization of Polymer/Cement Composites-3rd Edition.Polymers · 2025Article
- Enhancing the Analysis of Rheological Behavior in Clinker-Aided Cementitious Systems Through Large Language Model-Based Synthetic Data Generation.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, the compatibility of polycarboxylate ether-based water-reducing admixtures (PCE) with cements produced with different types and dosages of grinding aids (GA) was experimentally and statistically investigated. A total of 203 paste mixtures were prepared using seven different types of GA and one type of PCE at different dosages. The Marsh funnel flow time and mini-slump values of the mixtures were compared. A modeling study was performed using the experimental data. In this direction, Classical Regression Analysis (CRA), Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS), and Artificial Neural Networks (AOMA-ANN) were applied. Innovative approaches, AOMA-ANN (AIP) and AOMA-ANN (ONIP), were introduced. The results showed adverse effects on flow performance with increased GA utilization, except for TEA-based GA. TEA-type GA had the lowest flow performance. AOMA-ANN (ONIP) exhibited the best performance in modeling. Marsh funnel flow-time modeling with AOMA-ANN (ONIP) considered parameters such as sieve residue at 60 microns, the number of molecules per fineness, the density of GA, the pH value of GA, and the PCE dosage. Mini-slump modeling with AOMA-ANN (ONIP) considered parameters such as sieve residue at 60 microns, the density of GA, the pH value of GA, and the PCE dosage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.