MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910672459 · doi:10.1520/jte20180464

Evaluation of Superpave Moisture Susceptibility Considering Uncertainty

2019· article· en· W2910672459 on OpenAlexaff
Said M. Easa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodNormalityApplied mathematicsMathematicsMoistureStatisticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The existing Superpave method of evaluating moisture susceptibility is deterministic, relying only on the mean values. This technical note presents a new method for evaluating moisture susceptibility considering uncertainty. The method considers the uncertainties of the four measured properties (thickness and maximum load) of conditioned and unconditioned specimens in formulating the uncertainty of the tensile strength ratio (TSR). The probability distribution of TSR is established based on a normality assumption that is verified using Monte Carlo simulation. A simple formula is developed for checking whether the TSR criterion is satisfied, given a specified confidence level. Another formula that incorporates the uncertainty of the TSR criterion is also presented. The proposed method directly considers the uncertainties of the actual test variables and as such takes the current indirect National Cooperative Highway Research Program method of interlaboratory precision estimates one step further.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Testing and EvaluationSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207