MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2811425323 · doi:10.4236/ojce.2018.82019

Rutting Resistance of HMA Rehabilitated with Micro-Surfacing

2018· article· en· W2811425323 on OpenAlexaff
Arbia Garfa, Alan Carter, Anne Dony

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRutAsphaltAsphalt pavementMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work presented here is a study on the measurement and prediction of the rutting resistance of previously rutted asphalt mixes rehabilitated with a layer of micro-surfacing manufactured with virgin and recycled aggregates at different stages of aging. The experimental procedure consisted of rutting tests on hot mix asphalt slabs already degraded and repaired with virgin and recycled micro-surfacing. Then, the evolution of the behavior of micro-surfacing cast on the hot mix asphalt slabs is observed according to loading cycles of the pavement rutting tester MLPC. Before rutting tests, slabs are subjected to 24 hours at 50&degC and aged for 2 days and 5 days at 85&degC in the oven. The results showed rutting percentages of 6.3% for hot mix asphalt slabs aged for 2 days and 7.2% for 5 days. These hot mix slabs repaired with virgin micro-surfacing have rutting percentage of about 9.2 % for 2 days of aging and 6.5% for 5 days of aging. While, the HMA slabs repaired with recycled micro-surfacing have rutting percentage of about 8.1% for 2 days of aging and 5.9% for 5 days of aging. These results allowed the development of a prediction model based essentially on three predictor variables including cycle number, rutting state and percentage of water in the micro-surfacing material. The developed model shows a strong correlation between the predicted rutting values and the rutting values measured with the MLPC rut tester. Thermal aging in oven has a positive impact on the resistance to permanent deformation of new asphalt mixes and those rehabilitated with micro-surfacing. The parameters of rutting state and contribution water are significant in the rutting prediction model, while the cycle number remains a non-significant parameter in the model but determinant.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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