## 2 Materials and Method  
### Specim Preparation  
The material extraction and methodological parameters were established according to standardized geotechnical protocols. The soil specimens were sourced from Naibawa, Kano State, Nigeria (approximately 12.0833\({}^{\circ}\) N latitude) and classified as high-plasticity clay (CH) by ASTM D2487 [16]. Particle size distribution analysis using sieve and hydrometer tests revealed a fine-grained soil composition, with over 74% of particles passing the 200 mesh sieve (see Figure 1). The soil was initially air-dried in a controlled laboratory environment to standardize its initial moisture content. Lime and cement additives were commercially procured from Sharada Market in Kano State and subsequently stored in airtight containers to prevent pre-test carbonation or moisture absorption that could compromise experimental integrity. For the preparation methods, soil processing involved air-drying the samples, sieving them through a 0.075 mm aperture, and thoroughly homogenizing them with the additives using a mechanical mixer to ensure uniform distribution of stabilizers. The testing parameters encompassed both physical and mechanical properties. Physical characterization included particle size distribution analysis following ASTM D422 [17], determination of Atterberg limits per ASTM D4318 [18], and measurement of specific gravity according to ASTM D854 [19]. Mechanical testing consisted of unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests conducted in compliance with ASTM D2166 at a controlled strain rate of 0.076% [20], and consolidation testing performed through incremental loading as specified in ASTM D2435 using a standard consolidometer apparatus [21]. This comprehensive testing regimen enabled a thorough assessment of the soil stabilization efficacy across multiple engineering parameters. Table 1 shows the physical properties of the soil, lime, and cement. The suitability assessment confirms the clay soil meets established requirements for both stabilization methods according to ASTM standards. For lime stabilization, the soil satisfies critical criteria with a plasticity index of 42% (above the minimum 10% threshold) and 74.1% fines content (exceeding the minimum 25% requirement). The predominant montmorillonite composition provides high reactivity and cation exchange capacity, while the initial pH of 5.31 falls within the acceptable range for lime treatment. For cement stabilization, the soil meets gradation requirements with sufficient fines for adequate binding matrix formation. Organic matter testing confirmed the absence of compounds that could impair cement hydration, while sulfate content remained below the critical 1000 ppm threshold preventing potential expansion issues. The moderate optimum moisture content (21%) aligns with typical cement stabilization procedures. The high liquid limit (66%) and free swelling (71.1%) indicate expansive characteristics that benefit from stabilization through reduced plasticity and swelling potential. The initial low strength (779 kPa UCS) provides substantial improvement potential. These assessments confirm the selected clay represents an ideal candidate for both stabilization methods, meeting all specified criteria and enabling the comparative analysis presented in this study. Figure 1: Particle size distribution curve for a soil sample, with percentage passing plotted against particle size on a semi-logarithmic scale. Also, for high plasticity clay with montmorillonite as the dominant clay mineral, as indicated in Table 1. Montmorillonite clays are known to contain reactive silica and alumina in forms that can participate in pozzolanic reactions, though the reactivity varies depending on the clay's structure and crystallinity. The chemical composition analysis reveals that our soil contains silica and alumina compounds, though the manuscript does not explicitly distinguish between reactive and non-reactive forms of these constituents.