MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388407260 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2023-0158

Mechanical properties of unbound limestone aggregates replaced by recycled glass aggregate for pavement in Canada/Quebec

2023· article· en· W4388407260 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sahar Mohsenian Hadad Amlashi, Michel Vaillancourt, Alan Carter, Jean-Pascal Bilodeau, Elmira Khaksar Najafi, Reyhaneh Rahbar-Rastegar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete and Cement Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggregate (composite)Materials scienceGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGlass recyclingAsphalt pavementGeologyEnvironmental scienceAsphaltMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the use of recycled glass aggregate (RG) as unbound base/subbase material. The experimental tests included compaction, Los Angeles, Micro-Deval, and California bearing ratio (CBR) tests. In this regard, a fine proportion of course limestone aggregate (MG20) was replaced by RG with size ranging from 0 to 5 mm based on the volumetric method. Adding RG to the coarse aggregate improved durability in wet conditions, which is more representative of the field condition of Canada/Quebec, but decreased in dry conditions. CBR values decreased with increasing RG inclusion, but all blends with 0%–100% RG in the fine fraction of MG20 met minimum requirements for unbound granular layers in Quebec. A simple model predicting the resilient modulus values of these materials based on CBR values at different stress levels was suggested. This equation estimates Mr values of various aggregate-RG blends under a wide range of mean stresses based on their CBR values.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicConcrete and Cement Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207