MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417210593 · doi:10.1520/jte20240285

Study the Crack Development of Geosynthetics Interlayers in Bituminous Structures under Different Temperatures

2025· article· en· W4417210593 on OpenAlexafffund
Van Thang Ho, Celia Giani, Michel Vaillancourt, Eshan Dave, Alan Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOverlayReinforcementGeosyntheticsGeotextileAsphaltComposite numberDisplacement (psychology)Stress (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Overlay application is a widely used technique in pavement management systems for rehabilitation. This method proves particularly beneficial when the pavement structure retains sufficient structural integrity, allowing for the correction of visible distresses. However, the presence of deteriorated pavement poses a challenge to overlay performance, as it can lead to the upward propagation of existing cracks and joints into the overlay due to the concentration of stress and strain under the variations of loading and temperature in which those cracks, named reflective cracks, are created. This issue underscores the challenge of managing existing cracks when applying overlays. To mitigate this, interlayer systems such as geosynthetics are employed. Despite previous research in this area, a comprehensive understanding of the mechanical behavior of these composite systems is needed to enhance their effectiveness. This study investigates the effectiveness of the temperature as well as the position of reinforcement in the asphalt interface using the crack widening device. The outcomes showed that all the reinforcement can improve the performance of the system compared with the unreinforced one in most of the cases. All the reinforcement interlayers performed best at temperatures around 25°C ±2°C, regardless of the position of reinforcement, except in the case of geo-composite GV. Geo-composite GV exhibited the lowest maximum force values among others before failure at room temperature in both cases, reinforcement at one-third and two-thirds from the bottom of the samples, whereas the performance of geotextile was the best compared with other kinds of reinforcement and unreinforcement in terms of force and displacement at both one-third and two-thirds position in most of the cases. The reinforcement or emulsion placed at one-third position always outperforms those at two-thirds in most of the cases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Testing and EvaluationSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationFrench-language works237,207