EVALUATION OF A 15-YEAR ASPHALT PAVEMENT FOR HOT-IN-PLACE RECYCLING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hot-in-Place recycling was used on an experimental basis along the Provincial Highway System in Alberta from 1989-93. Since then, until 1999, 2 other projects were undertaken. In 1999, Alberta Infrastructure decided to use the hot-in-place recycling approach on a few projects for its Year 2000 rehabilitation program. One of these was a 20 km stretch of primary highway 2:58 and 2:60 located in the Peace Region of the Province of Alberta, approximately 500 km north west of the City of Edmonton. While this highway was identified for the treatment, the mandate was to first determine its suitability for the proposed treatment. This assessment involved undertaking field and lab testing of the existing asphalt concrete pavement from core samples taken at 19 locations approximately 1 km apart. A total of 57 cores were taken with 3 cores at each sampling location to obtain sufficient samples to undertake various characterization tests. Lab tests included core density, asphalt content, absolute viscosity, penetration, and gradation of the extracted aggregate. Test results were compared with features of the mixes and aggregate at the time of construction of the highway and with data from the 1989-93 investigations. The data evaluation yielded interesting information regarding characteristics of the asphalt cement, consistency in the production of the mix, and pavement compaction at the time of construction and 15 years later, as well as air voids and asphalt content characteristics. Based on test results, the physical condition of the pavement, and the structural soundness of the pavement, it was decided that rehabilitation by hot-in-place recycling would be beneficial and cost effective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".