MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W581925332

STRETCHING PAVEMENT LIFE WITH MICRO-SURFACING

2002· article· en· W581925332 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James L. Jorgenson

Bibliographic record

VenueTHE APWA REPORTER · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaterials Engineering and Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoad surfaceDrainageForensic engineeringLife expectancyEngineeringRoad constructionEnvironmental scienceAggregate (composite)Civil engineeringMaterials science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recommendations from a pavement condition and management analysis for the city of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1996 have lead to adoption of a yearly micro-surfacing program for residential streets. The objectives of the program include repairing road failures, ensuring the positive drainage from the pavement surface, and resurfacing the pavement with micro-surfacing. Critical to the success of the program was to emphasize the need for a preventive maintenance approach through micro-surfacing. This pavement preservation treatment was invented in Germany in the 1930s. It involves a mixture of emulsion, aggregate, water and mineral filler that is cold-placed in a thin layer on the road surface, leading to the sealing of surface irregularities and the reduction of moisture infiltration into the road surface. An analysis of the condition of the city's micro-surfaced streets in 2000 revealed that only 1.1% of the total area that had been micro-surfaced experienced failure. The analysis also made recommendations directed at quantifying the overall cost effectiveness of the micro-surfacing program and ensuring that life expectancy of the micro-surfacing treatment is maximized.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTHE APWA REPORTERSame topicMaterials Engineering and ProcessingFrench-language works237,207