Methods to Evaluate the Aging Grades of Reclaimed Asphalt Binder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) is of great significance for alleviating the problem of resource waste and land space occupation in the context of asphalt pavement. However, the use rate of RAP is still low in many countries because of limited understanding and no unified recycling guidelines, especially in terms of materials classification and aging grades. In this study, reclaimed asphalt pavements from sixteen different sections in southern China were collected, including with base and polymer modified asphalt (PMA). The performance of the reclaimed asphalt binder (RAB) at low, average and high temperatures was tested, using various methods, to find suitable indexes for categorizing aging grades. The viscosity (135 °C) and penetration (25 °C) were found to distinguish the aging degree of RAB the most consistently, and served as the indices to classify the RAB into different grades. To simplify the evaluation of aging grades, a comprehensive service life was determined using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, taking service years and surface levels into account. As a result, a good correlation was found between comprehensive service life and the aging grades.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".