Design of cold recycled mixes with asphalt emulsion and portland cement
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
Recycling techniques are important tools for rehabilitation of old and deteriorated asphalt pavements. The production of cold recycled mixes using reclaimed asphalt pavement as aggregates provides economic benefits as it decreases transportation costs, energy consumption, and gas emissions. Despite that, there is no internationally accepted methodology to design this type of mix. The present research evaluated the design of cold recycled mixes through different compaction methods and varying asphalt emulsion and cement contents. Different curing temperatures and periods were analyzed to propose a faster and more practical method for mix design in the laboratory. Mechanical tests performed indicated that specimens compacted by the Marshall hammer provide similar results when varying asphalt emulsion and cement contents, while the Proctor hammer compaction was able to better capture the influence of these materials. The temperature of 60 °C associated with shorter curing time is believed to be good for design purposes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it