Compactability and mechanical properties of cold recycled mixes prepared with different nominal maximum sizes of RAP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of cold recycled asphalt mixtures (CRM) has been soaring during recent years. Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) is the main component of CRM, and despite the numerous studies on CRM, the impact of different RAP types has not been deeply studied. This study compares the volumetric and several mechanical properties of CRM prepared with RAP from two different sources and with various nominal maximum sizes (NMS). The mix design was fixed, and specimens were prepared using gyratory and impact compactors. Densities were measured before and after accelerated curing. Stiffness of CRM was investigated with Indirect Tensile Stiffness Modulus, tension–compression, and dynamic tests. Additionally, the cracking behavior was evaluated with Indirect Tensile Strength and Semi-Circular Bending tests. The particle size distribution was a key factor in the compactability of the CRMs studied. Together with temperature, the most influential factor on the studied mechanical properties was the air void content, while the differences in NMS showed no clear trends.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".