State of the Practice for High Polymer-Modified Asphalt Binders and Mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper was to provide information on the state of the practice for using high polymer-modified (HP) asphalt concrete (AC) mixtures in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. This information was collected through a survey of U.S. and Canadian provincial agencies combined with a search of HP-related specifications, special provisions, and field trials or pilot projects previously constructed. Moreover, the Virginia Department of Transportation’s (VDOT) current state of the practice with regard to using HP paving material was determined. This was achieved through a navigation of VDOT databases to report tonnage and types of produced HP AC mixtures, and experience, lessons learned, and best practices on behalf of multiple asphalt contractors in the area. The majority of the agencies that currently use or have constructed field trials and pilot projects using HP AC mixtures are located in the eastern part of the U.S. In general, HP AC mixtures have been used in a wide range of applications ranging from full-depth AC to thin AC overlays under heavy traffic on interstates and slow-braking loads at intersections. No major field-related construction issues in relation to mixing temperatures and in-place compaction of HP AC mixtures were reported, and standard construction practices and equipment were used. Finally, good communication between the polymer/binder supplier and the contractor, and solid planning before conducting the work were important lessons learned with regard to paving with HP AC mixtures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.031 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".