Essential and Plastic Works of Ductile Fracture in Asphalt Binders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, no satisfactory asphalt binder test method exists that can relate properties measured in the laboratory to fatigue performance in service. The loss modulus of the binder, G*sinδ, as proposed by the Strategic Highway Research Program, is a rheological parameter that measures the energy dissipated within the homogeneous binder at low strains under dynamic conditions. A number of publications have reported that this binder parameter provides little correlation with the susceptibility of the asphalt concrete to fracture at high strains in the nonlinear regime under simulated in-service conditions. The essential work of the fracture method, an energy-based testing approach used for the fracture characterization of ductile materials, was explored. Given that asphalt is a ductile material at ambient temperatures, it is only reasonable to assume that the essential work of fracture method yields valuable information with likely use in fatigue performance ranking. The binders investigated showed a wide range of essential and plastic works of fracture at ambient temperature and a single rate of loading. Although only six binders were evaluated, their works of fracture were contrasted with other properties.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".