MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Slurry surfacing: a review of definitions, descriptions and current practices

2019· review· en· W2991378618 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Grilli, Andrea Graziani, Alan Carter, Cesare Sangiorgi, Luciano Pivoto Specht, Sérgio Copetti Callai

Bibliographic record

VenueRILEM Technical Letters · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltContext (archaeology)SlurryAggregate (composite)Construction engineeringForensic engineeringCivil engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeologyEnvironmental engineeringMaterials scienceGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold bitumen emulsions (CBE) are currently used worldwide for both non-structural (cold surface treatments) and structural (cold bituminous mixtures) paving applications. Among non-structural applications, bituminous slurry surfacings (BSS) allow to improve surface properties and extend the pavement’s life. However, selection of constituents, mix design, application and quality control procedures for BSS are mostly based on local experience and empirical tests. Thus, the use of BSS is associated to higher technical risks with respect to the use of traditional hot-mix technologies. In this context the RILEM Technical Committee 280-CBE TG2 “Multiphase characterisation of cold bitumen emulsion materials” aims to collect worldwide theoretical knowledge and experiences on BSS and to inspire new standards, specifications and guidelines encompassing the wide set of existing practices. This paper summarizes the first part of the literature review carried out as part of the TC workplan and focuses on the definition, the description and the application method for BSS. National standards, construction specifications and best practice documents from North America, South America, Europe and Australia are analysed and compared.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRILEM Technical LettersSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207