MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567561304 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2016-0460

Bio-based materials for improving winter pavement friction

2016· article· en· W2567561304 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Faranak Hosseini, Kamal Hossain, Liping Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceTransport engineeringCivil engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over five million tons of salt (NaCl) is applied in Canada every winter to improve pavement friction in the winter season. While effective for improving pavement surface condition, salts at high concentrations are detrimental to the environment and corrosive to vehicles and infrastructure. New alternative salts (bio-based products), are increasingly available in the market as an alternative to regular salt; however, limited information on the performance of these alternatives is available for transportation agencies to make informed decisions for their usage. In this study, a set of bio-based products were selected and their performances were compared using pavement friction improvement as a measure. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to identify the factors influencing pavement friction by utilizing these new materials. The analysis has indicated that using bio-based materials resulted in 10%–40% improvement in the friction level. However, these materials did not significantly outperform each other. The study also concluded that an application rate as low as 3 L/1000 ft 2 should be applied for parking lots or low volume roads, which is 25% less than the current application rates that are used in general for parking lot pavement maintenance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.162 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207