MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097183190 · doi:10.1139/l11-057

Effects of aggregate shape and size and surfactants on the resilient modulus of bituminous mixes

2011· article· en· W2097183190 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria DelRio-Prat, Elsa Sánchez-Alonso, Ángel Vega-Zamanillo, Daniel Castro‐Fresno

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de CantabriaUniversidad de AlcaláUniversidad de HuelvaCentro para el Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial
KeywordsGradationAsphaltCompactionAggregate (composite)ModulusMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringYoung's modulusPenetration (warfare)Composite materialMathematicsGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The resilient modulus of bituminous mixes is a fundamental property to bear in mind in pavement design as it enables the estimation of their structural behavior in roads. In this work, a comparative study of some fundamental variables has been carried out to determine their effect on the resilient modulus obtained using the indirect tensile test on cylindrical samples. To this end, the variables studied were gradation, aggregate type and origin, whether crushed or rounded, binder penetration, surfactants use and manufacture and compaction temperature. From the results obtained it can be concluded that the variables that most affect the modulus were bitumen penetration and manufacture and compaction temperature. These results were verified through statistical analysis, to this end an analysis of variance was performed and regressions models, with high coefficients of determination, were obtained. The statistical results clearly validate the concept of using the bitumen penetration and the temperature to estimate the resilient modulus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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