MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165576569 · doi:10.1177/03611981211012692

Performance Evaluation of Stabilized Base Course using Asphalt Emulsion and Asphaltenes Derived from Alberta Oil Sands

2021· article· en· W3165576569 on OpenAlexaffabout
Farshad Kamran, Manjunath Basavarajappa, Nura Bala, Leila Hashemian

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphalteneAsphaltRutEmulsionUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceCrackingOil sandsComposite materialMoistureGeotechnical engineeringChemical engineeringGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stabilization of the pavement base course using asphalt emulsion is one of the strategies that improves the layer’s strength and, consequently, enhances the pavement performance. In this study, to improve the performance of the asphalt-emulsion-stabilized base course, asphaltenes derived from Alberta oil sands bitumen are added to the mix. Asphaltenes are a byproduct of the deasphalting process of oil sand bitumen and have no significant value in the asphalt industry. The modified mixes are prepared by adding different amounts of asphaltenes in powder form to the mix at ambient temperatures. Marshall stability and indirect tensile strength of the mixtures are evaluated using different contents of asphalt emulsion and asphaltenes. The low-temperature performance properties of the selected mixtures are investigated using an indirect tensile test and for the high-temperature properties a wheel-tracking test is conducted. The results of this study indicate that the addition of asphaltenes to the emulsion-stabilized mix significantly improves rutting resistance, with a slight increase in moisture sensitivity. However, the indirect tensile test results also reveal that modified mixes are slightly more prone to low-temperature cracking than are unmodified ones.

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)0.006
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207