Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of U.S. public highway and road agencies that use chip seals as a part of their roadway maintenance program was developed and conducted as a part of NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 342. Ninety-two individual responses from across the United States, Canada, and overseas were received. This paper seeks to correlate individual chip seal performance ratings with the construction practices reported to achieve those ratings. It finds a number of strong correlations. The most important is that the ambient air temperature specification is generally higher [average of 60°F (15°C)] for those respondents reporting excellent or good chip seal performance. The same trend was observed with the average amount of time before full-speed traffic was allowed to traverse a newly sealed road, with the best performing seals having an average wait period 28 h. Finally, respondents reporting the best performing seals used more preseal preparation measures and more detailed traffic control measures. The same respondents validated the success of their construction procedures by not requiring a fog or scrub seal to be placed on a freshly chip sealed road.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".