Chemical, Morphological, and Fundamental Properties of Rejuvenated Asphalt Binders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the chemical characteristics of rejuvenators and the effect of different rejuvenators on the morphology and fundamental behavior of rejuvenated asphalt binders. Gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy (GC-MS) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) were conducted to determine the chemical composition of rejuvenators and asphalt surfaces’ morphology. Also, surface free energy (SFE) measurements were performed to quantify the cohesive bond energy of rejuvenated binders. The thin film oven test (TFOT)-aged performance graded (PG) 58-28 binder was rejuvenated with waste cooking oil (UT), chemically modified waste cooking oil (TR), and Hydrolene H90T (HL) at concentrations of 3%, 6%, and 9% by weight of the total binder. To understand the compatibility, styrene-butadiene-styrene (SBS) was also blended with rejuvenated binders. The experimental study found the variability of free fatty acid compositions in rejuvenators, which is hypothesized to affect pavement performance. Results showed that rejuvenation alters the surface microstructure of binders, which provides insights into the overall performance of the binder. Also, rejuvenation improves the moisture damage resistance of binders significantly. This experimental study found a good correlation between the chemical, morphological, and fundamental behavior of the rejuvenated binders, which is expected to help quantify the performance of rejuvenated asphalt mixes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".