Comparison of the moisture damage of bituminous binder coupled with glass and limestone substrate using pull-off test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the moisture susceptibility of different bituminous binders with two substrates (glass and limestone) was investigated. To that end, the tensile strength of different combinations of bituminous binder–substrate bond was measured using a pull-off test. This test was adapted from the pneumatic adhesion tensile testing instrument (PATTI) test to improve repeatability. Samples were tested in dry condition and after a 7-day conditioning in hot water bath (60 °C). An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the test results. Overall, the results show that in dry condition, the pull-off strength is a function of the bituminous binder type rather than of the substrate type. After water conditioning, an increase in the pull-off strength was observed for the bituminous binder without polymers and coupled with glass substrate. This was associated with an increase in binder stiffness. For the limestone substrate, the effect of water conditioning was significant only for one type of binder.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".