Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, results of an experimental study aimed to assess the suitability of a recycled content guardrail post as a substitute for conventional wooden guardrail post are presented. A series of static and dynamic tests performed on the recycled content guardrail posts show that the strength and energy dissipation of recycled posts are comparable to those of conventional wooden guardrail post. A full-scale crash test, using a 2000-kg pickup truck traveling at 100 km/h and making contact at a 25° angle, is also performed on the recycled content plastic-post W-beam guardrail system to evaluate its strength and structural adequacy. The barrier performed acceptably for National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) report 350 test designation 3-11. Results of the crash test show that the recycled content guardrail post and W-beam guardrail can successfully contain and redirect an errant vehicle, and they can be a potential substitute for nationally used guardrail posts. Finally, a recommended specification is developed for the recycled content guardrail posts based on a series of test procedures and performance levels.Key words: recycled plastics, roadside safety, crash test, guardrail post, strong-post guardrail system, recommended specifications, NCHRP report 350.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".