MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893668179 · doi:10.1080/10298436.2018.1526380

Linear viscoelastic (LVE) properties of asphalt mixtures with different glass aggregates and hydrated lime content

2018· article· en· W2893668179 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Lachance-Tremblay, Michel Vaillancourt, Daniel Perraton, Hervé Di Benedetto

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pavement Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceAsphaltViscoelasticityAggregate (composite)LimeComposite materialModulusMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the results of a research project examining the effect of glass aggregate and hydrated lime content on linear viscoelastic (LVE) properties are presented. Three glass aggregate contents (0%, 20% and 60%) and two hydrated lime contents (0%, 2%) were studied for a total of six different asphalt mixtures. All mixtures were fabricated in the laboratory using a PG70-28 polymer-modified binder. LVE properties were measured with the complex modulus (E*) test (tension compression on cylindrical specimens) at different temperatures (−35°C to +35°C) and frequencies (0.01 Hz to 10 Hz). Experimental E* test results were modelled with the 2S2P1D model. The Partial Time-Temperature Superposition Principle (PTTSP) was applied with good precision. Differences in terms of LVE properties were found for mixtures with glass aggregate compared with conventional mixtures. The glassy modulus, as well as the complex modulus norm, was decreased due to the glass aggregates. Moreover, the normalisation of the E* results showed that adding 60% glass changes the LVE properties. No notable effect related to the hydrated lime content was observed.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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