Deep Neural Network Models for the Prediction of the Aggregate Base Course Compaction Parameters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory tests for the estimation of the compaction parameters, namely the maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC) are time-consuming and costly. Thus, this paper employs the artificial neural network technique for the prediction of the OMC and MDD for the aggregate base course from relatively easier index properties tests. The grain size distribution, plastic limit, and liquid limits are used as the inputs for the development of the ANNs. In this study, multiple ANNs (240 ANNs) are tested to choose the optimum ANN that produces the best predictions. This paper focuses on studying the impact of three different activation functions: number of hidden layers, number of neurons per hidden layer on the predictions, and heatmaps are generated to compare the performance of every ANN with different settings. Results show that the optimum ANN hyperparameters change depending on the predicted parameter. Additionally, the hyperbolic tangent activation is the most efficient activation function as it outperforms the other two activation functions. Additionally, the simplest ANN architectures results in the best predictions, as the performance of the ANNs deteriorates with the increase in the number of hidden layers or the number of neurons per hidden layers.
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.
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 it