Performance comparison of asphalt emulsion stabilized granular base modified with cement or asphaltenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asphalt emulsion is a common material used for pavement base course stabilization, and cement is usually added as an active filler to improve the stability of asphalt emulsion mixtures further. However, using cement in these mixes has several drawbacks, including high material costs and environmental issues. On the other hand, asphaltenes is a waste by-product derived from the processing of Alberta oil-sands bitumen that could be used for the same purpose. This investigation compares the impact of cement and asphaltenes as additives to asphalt emulsion-stabilized layers. To compare the performance properties, cement- and asphaltenes-modified mixtures are prepared at different concentrations. The performance properties of the modified mixtures are investigated by conducting a series of tests including Marshall stability, indirect tensile strength, IDEAL-CT, and tensile strength ratio. In addition, to evaluate low-temperature cracking resistance of the mixtures, indirect tensile strength test is conducted at 0 °C and –10 °C.
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".