MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of Paving Condition on Longitudinal Cracking of Portland Cement Concrete Pavement

2013· article· en· W1992252695 on OpenAlexaff
Li Han, Liang Liang Chen, Bo Tian

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced materials research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurlingCrackingPortland cementFinite element methodSlabMaterials scienceStructural engineeringStress (linguistics)CementAxleGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The curling stresses of rigid pavement are the result of in-situ and built-in temperature gradient. A profound investigation on the reasons causing longitudinal cracking (LC) was conducted in this paper. Based on finite element method (FEM) analysis results obtained from ISLAB 2000, the wheel load stress generated by a single axle load that is applied along the transverse joints is considered to be the critical loading condition for longitudinal cracking. Nonlinear environmental stress due to the curling of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) was analyzed using the numerical program developed in this study; the paving time within a day has a significant influence on the curling stresses at the top portion of PCC slab at the critical loading position for longitudinal cracking. Research in this paper proposed an analytical method to determine the influence of the paving condition (day time and night time) on the built-in setting gradient and its effect on the in-situ effective equivalent temperature differential.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced materials researchSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207