MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623234586 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0085

Analysis of volumetric properties of bituminous mixtures using cellular phones and image processing techniques

2017· article· en· W2623234586 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Taleb Obaidat, Khalid A. Ghuzlan, Mai Alawneh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJordan University of Science and Technology
KeywordsAsphaltMicroanalysisAggregate (composite)Computer scienceFrame (networking)Image processingComputationPhoneMaterials scienceImage (mathematics)Computer visionAlgorithmComposite materialChemistryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to develop the microanalysis of the bituminous mixtures using cellular phone images (CPI) and image processing techniques (IPT). A new methodology and scheme was developed for faster and accurate procedure to compute volumetric design parameters; voids in mineral aggregate (VMA), voids in total mix (VTM), and voids filled with asphalt (VFA) using CPI and IPT instead of the conventional methods. Five types of cellular phones with different camera resolutions were used to analyze the horizontal cross section (face) of hot mix asphalt slices. A cellular phone digital mapping frame for microstructure of the bituminous mixture for data collection was designed and implemented. New models for computations of volumetric design perimeters (VMA, VTM, and VFA) were developed. Results showed that the best cellular phone for microanalysis of the bituminous mixture is type D, even though it does not have the highest resolution, and the best height of capturing the images is 35 cm.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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