Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this research was to determine an improved method for evaluating bridge deck sealer products for the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) through a synthesis of two testing methods: NCHRP Report 244 Series II tests and standards developed by the Alberta Ministry of Transportation (BT Series). Five sealer products were evaluated for their resistance to moisture and chloride ingress, performance after simulated traffic wear, and depth of sealer penetration into the concrete. The products tested included four epoxy-based sealer products and one sodium silicate sealer product. The sealers were evaluated on three different concrete mix designs representing the range of bridge deck concrete in service with ALDOT. Concrete cube specimens were fabricated, sealed, conditioned, and subjected to different tests. One test evaluated the waterproofing performance of sealers before and after abrasive conditioning (representing traffic wear). Another test determined the products’ ability to resist chloride penetration and their waterproofing performance in a saltwater solution. The chloride content was measured by potentiometric titration with silver nitrate and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF). Sealer penetration depth as determined by a dye method and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Initial (pre-abrasion) waterproofing performance results generally showed a good correlation to chloride resistance. XRF and titration analyses provided nearly identical results for measuring chlorides in concrete; however, XRF is a preferred method for determination of chloride content because it is much faster than titration. Two epoxy sealers outperformed all products for all evaluation criteria. A third epoxy sealer had good overall performance, but many specimens sealed with this product developed cracks that warranted further investigation. The sodium silicate sealer performed poorly compared to all four epoxy-based sealers. The epoxy-based sealers did not exhibit any measurable sealer penetration into the concrete and the sodium silicate sealer penetrated less than 100 m into the concrete. (Published By University of Alabama Libraries)
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".