Sustainable Pavement Maintenance and Preservation Practices: A Review of Current Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to report on the state-of-the-practice in sustainable pavement maintenance and preservation. This paper is concerned and directed at understanding how pavement maintenance and preservation practices minimize environmental impacts. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) differentiates between pavement preservation and pavement maintenance and uses this to allocate federal funds accordingly. While Canadian agencies recognize and practice the concepts of pavement preservation, there is no regulatory differentiation between it and maintenance as compared to the United States (U.S). Pavement preservation promotes environmental sustainability by conserving energy, virgin materials, and reducing greenhouse gases by keeping good roads good. Therefore, the foundation of a sustainable pavement maintenance program is to commit personnel and resources to pavement preservation. Currently, public agencies in the U.S. and Canada have done very little to extend the knowledge gained from research and practice in sustainable highway project delivery beyond construction completion and into the pavement preservation and maintenance phase of the road's life cycle. Thus, there are many opportunities for future research and enormous potential for agencies to accrue benefits in this area of practice. Treatments identified in this paper are primarily related to preservation and maintenance. However, these are not exclusive to preservation and maintenance and can be used in pavement rehabilitation.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".