MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522320205 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2016-0153

A conditioning method to evaluate moisture influence on the durability of asphalt mixture materials

2016· article· en· W2522320205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aboelkasim Diab, Cesare Sangiorgi, Mahmoud Enieb, Zhanping You

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDurabilityAsphaltMoistureConditioningEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringTest methodForensic engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the years, researchers have developed many laboratory methods for conditioning and evaluating the moisture damage of asphalt mixtures. Most of the tests do not fully simulate field conditions and the evaluation criterion does not always predict the long-term susceptibility to moisture damage. This paper aims to present a comprehensive conditioning and evaluation method that simulates field conditions to assess the durability of bituminous layers against moisture damage. The equipment consists of a system applying a cyclic load on samples in which water can be forced through. The assessment procedure is based on the indirect tensile strength test after the conditioning method, from which the concept of the Damage Rate as an indicator for classifying the durability of mixtures against moisture damage, was developed. The method would allow asphalt practitioners to evaluate the mixture for susceptibility to moisture on a routine basis.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207