Evaluation of degree of blending and its effect on performance of recycled hot-mix asphalt under different preheating conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research comprehensively explored the function of preheating temperature and quantified the contribution of degree of blending (DoB) to performance of recycled hot-mix asphalt (HMAs). Five groups were designed, including no blending group, full blending group, and three experimental groups at preheating temperatures of 60, 110, and 160 °C. It can be found that the preheating temperature played a positive impact on DoB and performance of recycled HMAs. As the preheating temperature increased by 50 °C, about 0.13%–0.2% of reclaimed asphalt binder can be additionally activated, and the tensile strength ratio, shear strength, and fracture energy of recycled HMAs can improve by around 6%–8%, 0.07–0.15 MPa, and 304.2–335.4 J·m2, respectively. Moreover, the results showed that the performance of recycled mixes designed at preheating temperature of 60 °C was close to that of no blending group, while the mixes designed at a preheating temperature of 160 °C can reach to those of full blending group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".