MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787430462 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0586

Investigation on the cooling medium effect in the characterization of asphalt binder with the bending beam rheometer (BBR)

2018· article· en· W2787430462 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Augusto Cannone Falchetto, Ki Hoon Moon, Di Wang, Chiara Riccardi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTechnische Universität Braunschweig
KeywordsMaterials scienceRheometerAsphaltComposite materialCreepCrackingRheologyStiffeningBendingThermal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the possibility of using air as an alternative cooling medium for testing asphalt binder in the bending beam rheometer (BBR) is considered and evaluated. For this purpose, five asphalt binders were characterized with the BBR; creep stiffness, m-value, performance grade (PG), thermal stress, and critical cracking temperature were computed both for ethanol and air. In addition, the rheological Huet model was fitted to the experimental measurements to further investigate the effect of the cooling medium. It was found that air measurements result in stiffer materials, with higher low PG, higher thermal stress, and critical cracking temperature. The parameters of the Huet model confirm such a stiffening effect when air is used. Based on the material response observed in this study, further research is recommended before potentially replacing ethanol with air in the BBR, as the latter appears to provide a substantially different material grading.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations28
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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