Optimizing Use of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement in Flexible Pavements in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Ministry's quest toward a more environmentally sustainable construction program, our recycling policies specifying when and how much Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) is permitted in Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) required review. The review came on the heels of the successful completion of a demonstration contract constructed in 1999 utilizing hot in-place recycling and Recycled Hot Mix (RHM). The demonstration showed that premium surface courses required for freeways could perform equally well with RAP in the HMA. To assist in revisiting our policy, a survey of other state agencies' recycling policies was conducted in 2008. Based on our findings, the Ministry is confident that the paving industry can produce HMA with higher percentages of RAP and has taken steps to permit HMA mix designers to make that choice. This also includes allowing RAP in mixes where we have traditionally not permitted any RAP, such as premium surface courses. Details of the Ministry's innovative pavement recycling program, which aims at providing a sustainable rehabilitation option that is safe, efficient, environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and that meets the needs of present-day users without compromising those of future generations, are summarized in this paper along with the results of our environmental scan.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".