MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336698487

Relationship Between Asphalt Lift Thickness and Pavement Smoothness - A Case Study (Poster)

2015· article· en· W2336698487 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lakkavalli, S Dhanoa, Colmenares Montanez

Bibliographic record

VenueTAC 2015: Getting You There Safely - 2015 Conference and Exhibition of the Transportation Association of Canada // ATC: Destination sécurité routière - 2015 Congrès et Exposition de l'Association des transports du Canada · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmoothnessInternational Roughness IndexAsphaltInlayAsphalt pavementLift (data mining)Surface finishEngineeringCivil engineeringComputer scienceMathematicsMechanical engineeringCartographyGeographyMaterials scienceData mining
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The City of Calgary is among very few Canadian municipalities to implement Pavement Smoothness Specifications for new and rehabilitation works. They are applied to major roads, which consist of nearly 28% of the network. Smoothness Specifications are based on International Roughness Index (IRI) measured using inertial profilers. Annually, The City rehabilitates about 1.5% (225 lane-km) of the network using a combination of treatments such as: mill and inlay, partial reconstruction and in-place recycling. This study looked at the impact of asphalt lift thickness on pavement smoothness, and the degree of smoothness improvement using IRI as reference.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.257
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTAC 2015: Getting You There Safely - 2015 Conference and Exhibition of the Transportation Association of Canada // ATC: Destination sécurité routière - 2015 Congrès et Exposition de l'Association des transports du CanadaSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207