Curing- and Conditioning-Related Reporting Limitations and Interpretation Errors in Geopolymer and Alkali-Activated Materials Research: A Critical Review

Curing and conditioning are processing variables in geopolymer and alkali-activated materials. Reaction kinetics, phase assemblage, pore development, and later mechanical and durability responses all depend on the environmental history of the binder. Published procedures, however, are often compressed into labels that do not allow the thermal, moisture, and timing paths to be reconstructed. This critical review examines recurring problems in the reporting and interpretation of curing terminology, thermal regimes, moisture and humidity control, pre- and post-curing timing, transfer of curing practices between chemically distinct binder families, and attribution of property changes to curing. Studies on fly ash, slag, metakaolin, red mud, volcanic ash, one-part binders, and phosphate-activated systems show that similar curing labels can conceal important differences in sealing, water availability, heating history, pressure, relative humidity, and specimen state. These differences may alter reaction development and microstructure enough to compromise reproducibility, cross-study comparison, and mechanistic interpretation. Curing is therefore considered here as a processing path that should be reconstructable from the reported procedure. A tiered framework is proposed for minimum, recommended, and comprehensive reporting. Clearer definition of curing paths should improve structure–property interpretation and provide the methodological basis for future comparisons of the resource intensity of thermal and moisture conditioning.