Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve the performance of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA), used by the City of Edmonton, an assessment of the rutting potential of the various mixes by means of testing with the Asphalt Pavement Analyser (APA) was undertaken. The standard surface course mix is a 12.5 mm Nominal Maximum Aggregate (NMA) sized HMA while the base course mix is a 20.0 mm NMA, both of which use the same conventional 150/200 A penetration grade binder. The study of the rutting performance of surface course mix used six different binders consisting of: conventional 80/100A; Performance Grade (PG) 76-28 Polymer Modified Asphalt (PMA); PG 64-28 PMA; PG 64-28 air blown; and PG 64-28 PMA from a different crude source. Testing of 15 base course mixes using the same group of binders, as well as increased amounts of fracture in the coarse aggregate, and a modified mix gradation using the higher fractured aggregates was also undertaken. Results of Dynamic Shear Rheometer (DSR) testing of the six binders is included and the paper indicates factors to be considered in selection of binders for mixes used to prevent rutting. Changes to the City HMA specifications were made as a result of the study and are documented.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".