Integrating Machine Learning for Improved Prediction of Temperature and Moisture in Pavement Granular Layers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Pavement temperature and moisture content within the base and subgrade layers affect the load-bearing capacity of the pavement and dominate the pavement performance in cold regions. Accurately predicting pavement temperature and moisture content can improve pavement design and management. Conventional approaches, including numerical and statistical models, have been implemented to predict pavement temperature and soil moisture content. However, they have weaknesses, such as being only suitable for warm regions or only for predicting pavement temperature within the asphalt layer. Furthermore, none of them can simultaneously predict the pavement temperature and moisture content. To address this issue, data collected from an instrumented test road in Alberta, Canada, were used to train a model to predict the daily average pavement temperature and moisture content at various depths through three parameters, namely depth, day of the year, and air temperature. The MATLAB toolbox, Neural Net Fitting, was used, and the performance of three built-in algorithms, Levenberg–Marquardt, Bayesian regularization, and Scaled conjugate gradient backpropagation, was compared. The model with Bayesian regularization showed the highest accuracy, with an R2 value of 0.99 and a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.49°C for pavement temperature prediction, and an R2 value of 0.95 and an RMSE of 0.025 m3/m3 for moisture content prediction. The model developed in this research is the first to simultaneously estimate pavement temperature and moisture content, so its performance was separately compared with two existing models in the literature. The artificial neural network (ANN) model shows higher accuracy than the two existing models, so it was found that the ANN could be a robust method for pavement temperature and moisture content prediction at various depths.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".