MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106040220 · doi:10.3141/1829-01

Time-Temperature Superposition and Physical Hardening Effects in Low-Temperature Asphalt Binder Grading

2003· article· en· W2106040220 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperposition principleEquivalence (formal languages)StiffnessTime–temperature superpositionHardening (computing)AsphaltMaterials scienceStructural engineeringEquivalence principle (geometric)Composite materialMathematicsEngineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the development of the Strategic Highway Research Program low-temperature binder specifications, in an effort to propose practical laboratory tests that require less time to perform, the time–temperature superposition principle was used to show that the stiffness after 2 h of loading at the performance-graded (PG) low temperature can be approximated by the stiffness after 60 s of loading at 10°C above the PG low temperature. This equivalence principle was developed on the basis of test results from the eight core asphalts and is widely accepted today. However, actual 2-h tests were not performed to experimentally validate this equivalence. Furthermore, the effect of physical hardening on time–temperature superposition was not considered. The validity of the time–temperature equivalence factor used in the low-temperature specification criterion and the ways in which the deviations could affect the current specification are evaluated.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · 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