Machine Learning Approach to Rapidly Evaluate Curling of Concrete Pavement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper focuses on the methodology for evaluating the degree of total curling in concrete pavement using machine learning. Deflection induced by falling weight deflectometer (FWD) testing is known as a direct correlation to total curling including built-in and daily curling. However, deflection measurement in the in-service road is also affected by others, such as environmental conditions, pavement geometry, subgrade stiffness, and mixture design. Thus, it is challenging to determine the level of curling from FWD data due to the complexity of influencing parameters. To navigate this complexity, prominent machine learning models are exploited to identify a non-linear relationship between curling and FWD deflections. A finite-element simulation of FWD is conducted to generate a vast data set, and a robust regression model is trained to estimate the total effective temperature difference (TETD) to quantify the effects of curling. Since input parameters for testing pavements can be measurable in the field, curling from TETD can be readily obtained using the proposed methodology. Comparative simulations highlight that the proposed models, with an MAE less than 0.5 °C significantly outperform the multiple regression performance, which registers an MAE of 3.45 °C in TETD, particularly in offering cost-effective and noise-tolerant prediction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".