MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243158834 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14668659.v1

Local calibration of MEPDG rutting model for Ontario’s Superpave pavements

2021· preprint· en· W4243158834 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gyan Prasad Gautam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersArizona Department of TransportationU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsRutCalibrationAsphalt pavementEnvironmental scienceResidualEngineeringTrenchCivil engineeringGeotechnical engineeringAsphaltMathematicsGeographyStatisticsMaterials scienceCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rutting models in the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) have been calibrated to Ontario’s conditions for flexible pavements of Marshall mixes, and have yet to be calibrated for the Superpave materials. This study differs from previous studies in several counts: First, the local calibration database included both Superpave and Marshall mixes. Second, two of the five local calibration parameters (the temperature and traffic exponents) were pre-fixed based on a secondary study of the NCHRP 719 report. Third, both cross-sectional and longitudinal calibrations were performed and compared. It was concluded that the Superpave and Marshall mix pavements should be separately treated in the local calibration and that the cross-sectional and longitudinal calibrations behaved drastically differently in terms of residual errors. A set of local calibration parameters were recommended for future pavement design. It was recommended that trench investigations be done to further validate the results from the study.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207