Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis presents the summary of several case studies on the long term performance of high recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) sections. Roadway sections which contained more than 20% RAP and that had been in place for at least 10 years were identified from across the United States and Canada with the help of the local agencies. The long term performances of these various recycled sections were compared directly to mixes made with similar virgin materials via measurements of distress criteria. These distress criteria included rutting, cracking, ride quality, and any overall performance rating that the local agencies used in evaluating their pavement sections. It was also insured that RAP and virgin sections were placed in the same general location and time frame as the recycled sections. In summary, pavement sections utilizing high RAP perform at a level comparable to that of virgin sections. The high RAP sections on average tend to exhibit more rutting and cracking than the virgin sections, but not to a level that significantly affected the long term performance of the pavements. The ultimate goal of this study was to provide the paving community with documentation on the long term performance of high RAP roadway sections compared to that of virgin sections.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".