MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323628445 · doi:10.1139/l2012-061

Structural field evaluation of pilot crumb rubber pavement test sections in Saskatchewan

2012· article· en· W2323628445 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrumb rubberSubbaseNatural rubberGeotechnical engineeringAsphaltHash-based message authentication codeAsphalt pavementMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2005, Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure (SMHI) piloted the use of crumb rubber modified hot mix asphalt concrete (HMAC) in test sections on a primary highway. Crumb rubber surfacing did not significantly influence the heavy weight deflectometer measured structural performance of the pavement test sections. Ground penetrating radar analysis showed minimal difference in the surface permittivity of the crumb rubber HMAC and conventional SMHI Type 71 HMAC surfacing. A visual inspection of the test sections found that crumb rubber HMAC had a more open texture that appeared to mask the visual identification of transverse cracks. However, thermal and reflective cracks were observed to be present in both surface types. In summary, crumb rubber modified HMAC pavement in Saskatchewan did not yield significant difference in structural or surface condition compared to conventional SMHI Type 71 HMAC surfacing after 3 years of service in the field.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.223 · 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