MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990845475 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2019-0227

Development of a multi-modal overlay tester for the evaluation of asphalt overlay cracking behaviors

2019· article· en· W2990845475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christopher Jabonero, Jin-Whoy Park, Sung Woo Ryu, Wuguang Lin, Yoon‐Ho Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Agency for Infrastructure Technology AdvancementMinistry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
KeywordsAsphaltOverlayCrackingMaterials scienceStructural engineeringTension (geology)ModalFracture (geology)Composite materialAsphalt pavementReflection (computer programming)RutGeotechnical engineeringGeologyEngineeringComputer scienceCompression (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reflection cracking is a critical issue in asphalt overlay pavement. Temperature variation and traffic loading are the main fracture modes acting on the material. In this paper, a multi-modal overlay tester is proposed for the evaluation of the reflection cracking resistance of an asphalt mixture, an approach that simulates three loading modes on asphalt specimens. A fine dense-grade hot mix asphalt is used as the test specimen and subjected to different loading conditions such as single Mode I, II, and III loading simulations and combined I+II and I+II+III loading simulations. Results show coefficients of variation (CVs) of 2.5%, 10.3%, and 7.4% for the Mode I, II, and III loading simulations, respectively. Furthermore, the β coefficient, with a CV of 7%, is used to represent the crack resistance of the asphalt mixture. Finally, the crack propagation occurs rapidly when subjected to tension and lateral displacement prior to repeated traffic loading simulations.

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)0.002
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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