MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577091385 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2016-0143

Field and laboratory permeability of asphalt concrete pavements

2017· article· en· W2577091385 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Moustafa Awadalla, A O Abd El Halim, Yasser Hassan, Imran Bashir, F Pinder

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of OntarioCarleton UniversityCantox Health Sciences International
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermeability (electromagnetism)AsphaltGeotechnical engineeringUltimate tensile strengthAsphalt pavementLaboratory testAsphalt concreteComposite materialMaterials scienceGeologyEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hot mix asphalt pavements that have been poorly designed, compacted, and (or) constructed have higher chances of experiencing moisture-related damage. This research evaluates the interrelationship between field–laboratory permeability and other mechanical and physical pavement characteristics. Eight sites in Eastern Ontario were selected for evaluating the pavement’s field permeability and core extraction. Laboratory specimens of the same mixes studied in the field were prepared using the Superpave gyratory compactor (SGC). The relative density (RD), lab permeability, and indirect tensile strength (IDT) tests were performed on the field-recovered cores and SGC specimens. Permeability, RD, and IDT were found to be related such that as RD and (or) IDT decreases, the permeability increases exponentially. The strength of these relationships varied for the three test settings (SGC, field-recovered cores, and field measurements). The coefficients of field permeability and laboratory permeability using field-recovered cores were statistically different, with a fair relationship between these two test settings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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