Effect analysis of using tall oil pitch (TOP) to partially extend bitumen in asphalt pavements: comparison of different TOPs
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
Tall oil pitch (TOP) is widely available as a by-product, but not sufficiently valorized and has potential as a bitumen extender. In this research, three types of TOP were used to prepare bio-extended binders of two grades based on the penetration and softening point of target neat binders. The chemical, rheological, and fatigue behaviour of bio-based binders and reference binders were investigated and compared. The optimum TOP contents were inversely determined based on penetration and softening point fitting equations. New C = O and C–O–C stretching can be found in bio-based binders. Different TOPs can significantly increase the viscous response of asphalt binders, resulting in better low-temperature properties but reduced high-temperature properties. A high amount of TOP can significantly reduce fatigue resistance. This work reveals that TOP can work as extenders for bitumen, but the performance of bio-based binders is affected by the TOP type and amount.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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