MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quest for improving service life of asphalt roads

2020· article· en· W3020005617 on OpenAlexaff
Manfred N. Partl

Bibliographic record

VenueRILEM Technical Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltCompactionProcess (computing)Service lifeEngineeringMaterial DesignService (business)SustainabilityConstruction engineeringComputer scienceCivil engineeringMechanical engineeringForensic engineeringMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selected results and initiatives in modern asphalt pavement research for increasing service life of asphalt pavements under the aspect of sustainability and multifunctional use of roads are summarized. Focus lies on innovative approaches and own experience, jointly elaborated during the last decades within the road engineering/sealing components lab at Empa and both the highway/railways engineering and building materials group at KTH. This includes material concepts and design as well as pavement system and construction aspects from an experimental and modelling point of view. It includes also the application of powerful experimental and computational tools, such as Atomic-Force-Microscopy (AFM), X-Ray-Computer-Tomography (CT), Digital-Imaging-Correlation (DIC) and Discrete-Element-Method (DEM). As for materials, recycling issues and the use of Phase-Change-Materials (PCM) or metallic ingredients for inductive thermal crack healing are addressed. In order to remind that material design must also account for the workability during the process of compaction, the new Compaction-Flow-Test (CFT) developed at KTH is shortly presented. Innovative ideas for structural material composition are also mentioned, such as “artificial aggregates” or “additive manufacturing”, being aware that there is still a long way to go. Regarding pavement systems, ideas for multifunctional road applications are proposed. Focus is also put on special issues, such as construction joints.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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