Suitable Test Method for Predicting Effect of Stripping on Mechanical Properties of Canadian Pavements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stripping of asphalt from aggregate is a complex physico-chemical process that can result in early surface layer distress. Several testing procedures have been proposed so far to relate some physical and mechanical properties of the asphalt mixture to its stripping propensity. In this research, a laboratory evaluation of different testing procedures is presented. The program consisted of measuring the unconditioned and conditioned resilient modulus, Marshall Stability, direct compression, indirect tensile, shear stress, and shear modulus on airfield and highways mixes that have been accepted by Public Work Government Service Canada (PWGSC) and Ministry of Transportation (MTO). Ratios of the unconditioned to the conditioned values of aforementioned test methods were used as evaluation criteria. The tests were applied to a surface mixture that included five aggregate combinations (120 samples), asphalt cement from different sources, and anti-stripping agent. Based on the statistical analysis of the results, Marshall Stability and Resilient Modulus tests were found to be the most promising. There was also a reasonably good correlation between Marshall Stability test and other tests which improve its credibility as predictors of stripping when applied to airfield and highway paving mixtures.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".