MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084345841 · doi:10.1139/l03-067

Évaluation de la résistance à la fatigue des enrobés bitumineux fondée sur l'évolution de l'endommagement du matériau en cours d'essai : aspects fondamentaux et application à l'enrobé à matrice de pierre

2003· article· en· W2084345841 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Daniel Perraton, Hassan Baaj, Hervé Di Benedetto, Michel Paradis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltMaterials scienceForensic engineeringGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fatigue of bituminous asphalts is one of the main types of pavement destruction. This phenomenon was studied extensively in Europe (RILEM) and in the United States (SHRP). There are no standardized tests in Quebec to assess asphalt fatigue resistance. In France, a new approach based on the determination of damage rates due to fatigue has been developed for a tension–compression test on asphalt core samples to study their fatigue strength. This paper presents a summary of the knowledge on asphalt fatigue. Damage rate analyses, developed by the DGCB (Département de Génie Civil et du Bâtiment) of the ENTPE at Lyon, is detailed and applied to stone matrix asphalt (SMA). Results show the validity of the approach by damage and the good fatigue damage strength of the SMA.Key words: bituminous asphalts, fatigue, complex module, damage, stone matrix asphalts (SMA), viscoelasticity, mechanical properties of bituminous asphalts.[Journal Translation]

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207