Pavement System Suiting Local Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the early 1990s, the Ministry of Transportation of Quebec (MTQ) has placed renewed emphasis on constructing long-lasting concrete pavements suiting local traffic and climatic conditions. In 2000, these efforts led to the installation of Canada's first roadway with continuously reinforced concrete pavement (CRCP). However, 5 years later, concerns were raised about the long-term performance of CRCP, as portions of this initial installation were found to have insufficient cover over the bars, and core samples showed that the longitudinal reinforcement was corroding at transverse cracks. These observations led the MTQ to select galvanized steel as the standard reinforcement for subsequent CRCP projects and to continue investigating other systems with enhanced corrosion resistance. As part of these investigations, the MTQ and the University of Sherbrooke began studying the use of glass fiber-reinforced polymer bars for CRCP in September 2006. A stretch of test pavement has since been constructed on eastbound HW-40 in Montreal. This article summarizes the design concepts, construction details, material properties, early-age behavior, and preliminary monitoring results for this test pavement after 18 months in service.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".