MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104751677 · doi:10.1080/10298436.2011.575142

Review of advances in understanding impacts of mix composition characteristics on asphalt concrete (AC) mechanics

2011· article· en· W2104751677 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pavement Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAsphaltAggregate (composite)Asphalt pavementComposition (language)Materials scienceFinite element methodComputer scienceStructural engineeringEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overall performance of an asphalt concrete (AC) mixture is dependent on its composition including the properties, proportions and distributions of the ingredients. For existing asphalt mix design methods, however, there is a missing link between the mix composition and the overall properties and performance. To improve the fundamental understanding of AC mixtures, this paper presents a comprehensive review of the advances in understanding the mix composition characteristics and their impact on AC mechanics. This review focused on the links between the mix composition and the overall properties. The review contains a brief background of this study, followed by a discussion of four typical mixture composition characteristics, namely aggregate size, aggregate morphology, asphalt matrix time-dependent properties and anisotropic AC microstructural characteristics. Furthermore, three types of methods were reviewed for understanding the links between the composition characteristics and the AC behaviours: the experiment-based methods, multiphase micromechanical models and numerical models. The numerical models include discrete element models and finite element models. Finally, a brief summary and further research needs are provided.

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.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.242 · 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