MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094069063 · doi:10.3141/1958-08

Cooling Rates in Hot-Poured Bituminous Sealants

2006· article· en· W2094069063 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Collins, J.-F. Masson

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSealantWettingMaterials scienceRheologyAsphaltComposite materialAdhesionForensic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of bituminous sealants applied to cracks and joints is partly governed by installation. An important installation parameter yet to be investigated is the sealant rate of cooling after it is poured hot. Cooling rates affect sealant microstructure and rheology, adhesion at the sealant–hot-mix asphalt interface, and the time during which traffic must be rerouted. To provide data on sealant cooling rates, the temperature change in three sealants was measured in the field and in the laboratory. Results indicated that sealant bulk temperatures were >50°C lower than the sealant application temperature, typically 180°C, almost immediately after pouring, and that sealant bulk temperatures reached 40°C or less within 15 min. This finding suggests that traffic could be rerouted for less time than the standard 30 min. The instantaneous sealant temperature at the sealant–substrate interface was also measured to be below 100°C immediately after pouring of the sealant. This finding emphasizes the need for sealants with good wetting propensity to maximize the potential for proper adhesion.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207