Machine Learning Approach to Rapidly Evaluate Curling of Concrete Pavement
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it