Composite Asphalt Binders: Effect of Modified RPE on Asphalt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recycled polyethylene (RPE) modified asphalts were prepared and characterized. The RPE was modified with different copolymers before incorporating into the asphalt. A special morphology was found for this system. The RPE particles are highly swollen by asphalt. This morphology is attributed to physical interactions. The presence of copolymers in RPE was found to change the RPE's affinity toward asphalt constituents. Aging of asphalt, oil absorption by polymer particles, and interactions of polymer particles with asphaltenes affect the overall rheological properties of polyethylene modified asphalts. Attempts to approach the rheological behavior of polymer modified asphalt with rheological models for filled polymers were not found to be conclusive. Other specific features of asphalt must be taken into account. These include, for example, changes in the structure that were evidenced by their relaxation time spectra and molecular weight distributions. The polymer modification of asphalt affected the asphalt properties. Well controlled thermomechanical history experienced by the asphalt is needed to differentiate between the chemical changes of the binder due to the mixing process and the beneficial effect of the polymer for high-performance asphalts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".