MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115330929 · doi:10.1080/10298430802169440

Time–temperature superposition in rheology and ductile failure of asphalt binders

2008· article· en· W2115330929 on OpenAlexafffund
Adrian Andriescu, Simon A.M. Hesp

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pavement Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMinistère des TransportsRural Development Administration
KeywordsAsphaltRheologyDynamic shear rheometerRheometerSuperposition principleTime–temperature superpositionMaterials scienceComposite materialGeotechnical engineeringStructural engineeringForensic engineeringEngineeringViscoelasticityMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper documents and discusses an investigation into the time–temperature superposition principle as it relates to ductile failure in asphalt. Seven binders of approximately the same low and intermediate temperature and varying high temperature Superpave® grades were tested in a dynamic shear rheometer (DSR) and double-edge-notched tension test to determine their rheological and failure energy master curves. Master curves typically permit the prediction of rheological properties at very long or short timescales from measurements at higher or lower test temperatures over more accessible testing timescales. It has been suggested in the Strategic Highway Research Program final report A-369 that rheological shift factors obtained from a DSR experiment can be used to predict failure master curves from experimentally accessible data at various temperatures. The findings of this study suggest that this substitution is not generally accurate. For straight asphalt binders the difference can be relatively small but for more highly modified materials serious errors would be introduced.

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)0.004
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations43
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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