MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096891848

RAPID IN-SITU SHEAR TESTING OF ASPHALT PAVEMENTS FOR RUNWAY CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE By:

2015· article· en· W7096891848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRunwayAsphaltChristian ministryQuality assuranceMinistry of TransportAsphalt concreteAsphalt pavementStiffness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, almost all airport runways have been constructed or rehabilitated with hot mix asphalt concrete based on cost, performance and speed of construction considerations. As with highway pavements, permanent deformation through heavy (aircraft) traffic then becomes a major concern to airport authorities, who cannot afford premature failure of runway pavements. In cooperation with the United States Transportation Research Board and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, researchers at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada have developed the In-Situ Shear Stiffness Test (InSiSST ™ ) – a new test facility for measuring shear properties of compacted asphalt concrete layers in the field. The ability to rapidly measure in-situ pavement properties immediately after construction is particularly beneficial to airport applications, as the runway may be re-opened to aircraft quickly, with confidence that the pavement will perform as expected. A brief introduction to the InSiSST ™ facility is provided, however, the primary objective of this paper is to present the results of laboratory and field testing with InSiSST ™ to develop a quality control and assurance test based on fundamental shear properties. To date, these results

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207