MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212265469 · doi:10.3390/ma14226828

Enhanced Acceptance Specification of Asphalt Binder to Drive Sustainability in the Paving Industry

2021· article· en· W3212265469 on OpenAlexafffund
Yiming Li, Simon A.M. Hesp

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMinistère des Transports
KeywordsAsphaltCreepDynamic shear rheometerMaterials scienceCrackingRutFatigue crackingRheometerUltimate tensile strengthStiffnessComposite materialRheologyStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Testing small amounts of extracted and recovered asphalt binder as used in construction allows for the acceptance of materials in accordance with traffic and climate requirements. This approach facilitates the sustainable use of resources and thus prepares the paving industry for the true circular economy. Oscillatory, creep, and failure tests in a rheometer are compared for the performance grading of 32 asphalt binders extracted and recovered from real-world contract samples. Films 8 mm in diameter and 0.5 mm thick were tested from 35 to -5 °C in dynamic shear, followed by shear creep at 0 and 5 °C, and finally in tertiary tensile creep at 15 °C. The enhanced protocol uses a very small amount of material in contrast to current methods, yet it provides comparable results. Phase angle measurements appear to be optimal for performance grading, but further field study is required to determine if additional binder properties such as stiffness and/or failure strain would be required for the control of cracking.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.285
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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207