ArticleScientific reports2026
A comparative evaluation of sustainable asphalt binder modifiers for enhanced performance.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Evaluation of Short-Term PAV and Conventional Short-Term Aging Protocols for Thermoplastic-Modified Asphalt Binders.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Asphalt pavement production accounts for approximately 1.5% of global carbon emissions, underscoring the need for sustainable binder modification strategies that enhance performance without compromising durability. Existing studies on eco-friendly asphalt modifiers remain largely fragmented, limiting cross-comparison and mechanistic understanding. This study develops a unified, multi-scale experimental framework to comparatively evaluate waste-derived polymers and geopolymer-based modifiers under identical processing and testing conditions. Five modifiers, crumb rubber (CR), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), a combination of CR/LDPE, fly ash (FA), and metakaolin–silica fume (MK–SF) geopolymers, were assessed alongside a commercial fiber elastomer modifier (VIATOP), using two virgin binders from Egyptian refineries to capture source dependency, resulting in twelve modified systems. Binder behavior was evaluated through integrated microstructural (SEM), chemical (FTIR and CI + SI indices), thermal and photochemical (TGA and UV–Vis), and rheological (viscosity and performance grading) analyses. Results show that geopolymer modifiers provided the most consistent improvements across scales, reducing chemical aging indices, increasing decomposition onset temperatures by approximately 10–20 °C, suppressing UV-induced aromatic growth, and maintaining workable viscosities (< 500 cP at 135 °C) with moderate Performance Grade (PG) enhancement ( ≈ + 2–4 °C). Crumb rubber offered balanced performance, yielding moderate PG increases ( ≈ + 4–5 °C) with improved aging resistance. In contrast, LDPE and VIATOP produced the largest PG increases (up to ≈ + 10–13 °C) but exhibited poorer dispersion, higher oxidation, and reduced thermal and UV stability, indicating short-term stiffening rather than long-term durability. The hybrid CR/LDPE combination showed intermediate, partially synergistic behavior. Overall, the study demonstrates that rheological gains alone are insufficient indicators of durability and highlights the decisive role of base binder chemistry. The proposed framework provides quantitative, transferable design guidance for selecting sustainable asphalt modifiers that balance stiffness, durability, and aging resistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.