MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593797268 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2016-0540

Panel data analysis of surface skid resistance for various pavement preventive maintenance treatments using long term pavement performance (LTPP) data

2017· article· en· W2593797268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qiang Li, You Zhan, Guangwei Yang, Kelvin C. P. Wang, Chaohui Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkid (aerodynamics)EngineeringOverlayPavement managementInternational Roughness IndexRutEnvironmental scienceAsphaltCivil engineeringStructural engineeringComputer scienceMaterials scienceSurface finish

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various preventive maintenance (PM) treatments have been employed to restore pavement skid resistance for enhanced safety. This paper investigates the effectiveness of PM treatments using panel data analysis (PDA). Panel data analysis investigates the differences of cross-sectional information among treatments, but also the time-series changes within each treatment over time. Panel data with multiple years of friction data for four treatments (thin overlay, slurry seal, crack seal, and chip seal) at various climate, traffic, and pavement conditions are obtained from 255 long term pavement performance (LTPP) testing sections. Both fixed- and random-effects models are developed to evaluate pavement skid resistance performance and to identify the most influencing factors. Results from the PDA models are compared to those from traditional ordinary regression models. Slurry seal is demonstrated to be the most effective treatment. Five factors (precipitation, freezing index, humidity, traffic, and pavement age) are identified to be significant for pavement friction. Fixed-effects panel model is selected for the development of friction prediction models. This study not only demonstrates the capability of PDA for analyzing friction data with cross-sectional and time-series characteristics, but also can assist engineers in selecting the most effective PM treatments for the desired level of skid resistance to reduce traffic crashes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207