MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952813553 · doi:10.1520/jte20170672

Assessment and Modeling of Aging Effect on Asphalt Material Dynamic-Mechanical Properties

2019· article· en· W2952813553 on OpenAlexaff
A. S. M. Asifur Rahman, Hasan M. Faisal, Rafiqul A. Tarefder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltMaterials scienceComposite materialStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this study, the effects of progressive aging on the dynamic-mechanical characteristics of asphalt and asphalt concrete were assessed and evaluated. Field-collected asphalt-aggregate mixture was used to prepare asphalt concrete test specimens. These specimens were then subjected to five aging levels and tested for dynamic-mechanical properties in the laboratory. Results showed that the dynamic-mechanical characteristics of asphalt concrete are significantly affected by progressive aging. In addition, aged asphalt binders that corresponded to the asphalt concrete samples aged at various aging levels were tested for complex shear modulus using a dynamic shear rheometer. A significant effect of progressive aging on the complex shear modulus and viscosity of the binder was observed. A detailed assessment showed that even though the mechanical behavior of asphalt binder significantly changes because of aging, the corresponding asphalt concrete sample does not necessarily show similar change in its behaviors. Finally, this study developed an approach to estimate the dynamic-mechanical characteristics of the aged asphaltic materials. Using this approach, it may be possible to predict the mechanical behaviors of aged asphalt concrete and binder. It is hoped that the developed approach can be useful for advanced modeling of asphalt pavements.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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