A Test Protocol for Evaluating Absorption of Joints in Concrete Pavements
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Premature deterioration at joint spresents a critical durability issue of concrete pavements associated with considerable repair costs. Durability of concrete exposed to aggressive environments depends mainly on the penetrability of its pore structure. Because absorption has been used as an important indicator for quantifying the durability of concrete, the aim of this study was to develop a customized test protocol for determining the absorption capacity of joints in concrete pavements. The study involved three phases with thorough statistical analyses of results. In Phase I, different absorption procedures were applied to laboratory specimens prepared with water-to-binder ratios (w/b) of 0.3, 0.5, and 0.6, representing variable qualities of concrete. The most efficient procedure was identified from Phase I and further verified in Phase II on concrete specimens prepared with a close range of w/b (0.35 and 0.40). In Phase III, the performance of the absorption protocol selected from the previous phases was assessed on cores extracted from recently constructed pavement sections in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. To further complement and verify the trends obtained from the absorption protocol, mercury intrusion porosimetry tests were conducted on the field cores to capture the characteristics of the pore structure. The results indicated that the proposed absorption protocol was efficient, robust, and reliable in reflecting the physical features of the microstructure of field pavement sections, including joint locations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it