Development of Aged Tire Durability Standard - Accelerated Laboratory Static Aging
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">In the work leading to the TREAD Act, some members of Congress expressed the need for some type of aging test on light vehicle tires. Since no industry-wide recommended practice existed, the ASTM F9.30 Aged Tire Durability task group was established in 2002 to develop a test standard. After several years of phase 1 research, the task group identified key learning about both static and dynamic laboratory aging. Accelerated aging conditions for both approaches were examined by statistically and empirically analyzing property changes of both field and laboratory aged tires relative to the corresponding properties of a new tire. The research encompassed the evaluation of test data from field tires that were directly compared and analyzed against the data generated from tires that were laboratory aged on an accelerated basis.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">This presentation focuses on the effects of static aging in an oven using a 4 variable statistical design of experiment.</div>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it