Cumulative Distribution-Based Method for Pavement Performance Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pavement performance prediction is the basis for maintenance decisions. Predicting future pavement conditions accurately and efficiently helps determine the optimal maintenance time, select appropriate measures, and allocate rehabilitation funds effectively. However, limited to the instability and variability in pavement condition data collection, deterministic models are not always reliable for all pavement situations. On the other hand, probabilistic-based models are influenced by environmental factors that are challenging to quantify. Recognizing the limitations of the above two methods, this paper proposes a cumulative distribution-based technique for developing pavement performance prediction models. First, after comparing performance metrics such as pile-by-pile single-point, probability density, and cumulative distribution, it is evident that the cumulative distribution is the most reliable method for describing pavement conditions. A continuous distribution function is created from a limited set of discrete observed field pavement condition data using the sampling theorem. With cumulative distribution-based deterioration curves changing over time, it is possible to predict future pavement deterioration rates. A case study is presented at last. Analyses of the predicted curve and observed pavement performance indicate that the cumulative distribution-based technique is effective in modeling pavement performance and can provide reliable predictive results.
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 | 0.001 | 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".