【土木計画学研究・論文集

Vol.26 no.1

2009年9月】

A BENCHMARKING APPROACH TO PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT:LESSONS FROM VIETNAM
by Le Thanh NAM ** , Nguyen Dinh THAO***, Kiyoyuki KAITO**** and Kiyoshi KOBAYASHI*****

1. Introduction
Infrastructure asset management in developing nations is about at the outset of development like that of developed nations in the
beginning of economic boom period several decades ago. Thanks to the earlier development in various types of infrastructuretechnologies in developed nations like the America, Japan, and other European countries, developing countries can take a great
advantage in view of technology and management to apply in their nations. As a rule of thumb, in order to introduce foreigntechnologies into developing nations, technologies need to be verified its adaptability and conformity with local conditions.
However, the practice of verification has not yet been seriously considered in actual implementation. Therefore, various types ofinfrastructure technologies have been simultaneously used. In many cases, developing nations have to spend enormous amount of
their resources to compensate the negative impacts of applying unsuitable technologies or to propose national standard and norm of
applying foreign technologies in a long term development.
As for the pavement management system (PMS), the quest for selecting the best pavement technology based on material,
structure, and construction technique, is realized in high attention, especially in developing nations1). A good example is the case ofVietnam, where the national road system comprises of many different technologies. Reason to this is, as the matter of fact, due tothe lack of technological knowledge, the country often borrowed technologies from abroad. National standards for design andconstruction practices are somewhat mimic versions of guidelines, most of them are copied from developed nations. This practiceis definitely unlike to that of developed nations. Consequently, leads to a huge amount of efforts and budget in monitoring andmaintenance during operation phases. Hence, in view of long term and strategic management, there is a strong demand in
searching for the best pavement technology, which is hoped to become a national standard in pavement management system.
Selection for the best technology in the PMS is thereby, having a close link to the methodology of benchmarking, which
provides a managerial approach for finding out the best practice. Evidently, the core part of benchmarking study in the PMS is theapplication of hazard model. Because, hazard model is indispensable in estimating the deterioration of a road network, whichbecomes the most important key performance indicator for benchmarking.
In the network level of PMS, there are many groups of road, which are often categorized by the differences in technology. When
applying conventional hazard models, monitoring data of the entire network is considered as a representative database used to
predict the deterioration of the entire network system. This practice has its limitation that it is difficult to apply for estimating thedeterioration of respective groups in the network. Especially, under the requirement of benchmarking, which aims to compare thedeterioration of individual group of road in the network.
In regard to the development of deterioration-forecasting model, in recent years, the application of Markov chain model has been
one of the major innovations. Markov hazard model helps users to predict hazard rates, life expectancies, and deterioration curvesof infrastructure system such as bridges and highways given the historical observed condition states and characteristic variables
concerning various environment impacts such as traffic volume, weather, temperature, axle load, etc. The application of Markov*Keywords: Markov hazard model, optimal inspection and repair, pipeline system** Member of JSCE, Graduate Student., Dept of Urban Management., Kyoto University,(Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto, TEL 075-383-3224, FAX 075-383-3224, E-mail: info.tna@t06.mbox.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp)*** Lecturer., Dept of Civil Engineering., University of Transport and Communication, Vietnam(Lang Thuong, Dong Da, Hanoi, E-mail: dinhthao.utc@gmail.com)**** Member of JSCE, Associate Professor., Frontier Research Center, Graduate School of Engineering., Osaka University,(2-1, Yamada-oka, Suita, Osaka, TEL 06-6879-7589, FAX 06-6879-7601, E-mail: kaito@ga.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp)***** Member of JSCE, Professor., Dept of Urban Management., Kyoto University,(Katsura, Nishikyo-ku, Kyoto, TEL 075-383-3222, FAX 075-383-3224, E-mail: kkoba@psa.mbox.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp)- 101 -

chain model has gained its high recognition for its flexibility of modeling and high operational capacity2), 3). However, the study ofMarkov hazard model to tackle the problem of inhomogeneous sampling population is not numerously documented.
This paper presents an analytical methodology to obtain the heterogeneity factor of individual pavement group based on thelocal mixture hazard model, and further explore a benchmarking application in order to select the best pavement technology forstandardization and long-term application. Special focus is on benchmarking material types in highway system of developing
countries, where there is a urgent need to find out the best pavement technologies for long-term application and standardization ofpractices in design, construction, and maintenance.
The following section gives an overview of research background with focus on Markov chain model and mixture hazard model.
Section 3 briefly presents the exponential Markov deterioration hazard model3), to which, this study herein builds on. Section 4
details the mathematic formulation of local mixture hazard model and its estimation approach. An empirical study on the nationalroad system of Vietnam is discussed in section 5. Finally, section 6 summarizes the contributions of the paper and further includes
a discussion for future research.
2. Background
Markov chain models have been widely applied in the practice of deterioration-forecasting in infrastructure management 4), 5). In
Markov chain models, the healthy status or performance of an infrastructure component is described in discrete condition states,
which are defined by means of single performance index or an aggregate index. The values of indexes are measured by monitoring
and visual inspection. For example, in the case of pavement management system, the condition states include the extend of several
pavement distress such as rut and cracking, or some aggregate condition states, such as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) 6). The
deterioration of an infrastructure component is portrayed as a transition process of condition states along the duration.
Further to the application of Markov chain model in PMS, other prominent studies have addressed the application of somestatistic distribution such as Weibull, Gamma, Poison, and Exponential distribution families3),7), 8). In addition, in an effort to capture
the hazard rates of different groups in an infrastructure system, heterogeneity factor is embedded in the Markov chain model. The
Markov hazard model with embedded heterogeneity factor is named as "Mixture hazard model"5), 9).
In the practice of stochastic estimation, the heterogeneity factor is assumed to follow a stochastic distribution. Attempt to apply
Gamma distribution for heterogeneity factor in probabilistic approach has been implemented in a larger scale information system,
where the breakdown of informative devices follows Weibull function 10). This probabilistic approach can also be used to apply on
the pavement system. However, the assumption of heterogeneity factor in probabilistic manner may not always reflect the reality.
And as the matter of course, an explicit form for the numerical computation may be difficult to acquire. This problem can be
regarded as a limitation of probabilistic approach.
In order to overcome the limitation of probabilistic approach, local mixture model is recommended as an alternative solution 5),
11). In the local mixture hazard model, the distribution of heterogeneity factor is to follow Taylor series, which eventually reduces
the computational complexity. However, to date, it has not been seen in the literature of reliability engineering and operations
research with a full scale study on the mixture hazard model, especially in combination with the Markov chain model.
A recent study on risk management in pavement system using local mixture model has attracted attention for benchmarking
study on pavement management system 12). This study employed Markov chain model for estimating the hazard rate and Markov
transition probability. However, it remains with several limitation such as a full scale of benchmarking study was not targeted.
Further, empirical study focused only on a small numbers of samples. Thus, the aim of this paper is to propose a comprehensive
estimation methodology of local mixture model and its applicability for benchmarking purposes.
3. Markov Deterioration Hazard Model
This section briefly presents the general mathematical formulation of the exponential Markov deterioration hazard model
developed by Tsuda et al. (2006)3), which is the background model of this paper. In his paper, the healthy status of the road isreflected by condition state i (i=1,….,I), with i=1 as the new condition state (in sound condition) and i=I as the worst condition
state (absorbing condition state). At time τ0 the condition state is i=1. Over the years, condition state i(i=1,…,I) will advance into
worse condition states. Visual inspections are carried out at time τA and τB , and reveal only the actual condition states at inspection- 102 -

times. The true condition states in the period between the two inspection times are unobservable. Based on monitoring datacollected from two visual inspections h(τA)=i at τA and h(τB)=j at τB, the Markov transition probability πij can be defined asProb[h(τ B ) = j | h(τ A ) = i ] = π ij .

(1)

The life expectancy of condition state i is assumed as a stochastic variable, with the probability density function fi(ζi) anddistribution function Fi(ζi) 5), 12). The conditional probability, to which condition state i at time yi reaching condition state i+1
at yi + Δ i , can be expressed as hazard function λi ( yi )Δyi :λi ( yi )Δyi =f i ( yi )Δyi,
F%i ( yi )(2)where F%i ( yi ) = 1 − Fi ( yi ) is referred as the survival function of condition state i during the time interval from yi = 0 to yi .
It is assumed that the deterioration process satisfies the Markov property and the hazard function is independent of the time
instance yi . Thus, we can define a fixed value for λi > 0 as the hazard rate.

λi ( yi ) = λi .

(3)

The life expectancy of condition state i, which advances longer than the duration yi, is referred as the value of survival function
F%i ( yi ) and can be expressible in the exponential form:
F%i ( yi ) = exp(−λi yi ) .

(4)

The survival probability function is identical to the transition probability πii when the duration yi equals to the duration z of theinspection period zi between [τA :τB]:
exp{−λi (τ A + z )}
F%i (τ A + z | ζ i ≥ τ A ) = Prob{ζ i ≥ τ A + z | ζ i ≥ τ A } == exp(−λi z )exp(−λiτ A )(5)

Prob[h(τ B ) = i | h(τ A ) = i ] = = exp(−λi z )(6)

By defining the subsequent conditional probability of condition state j to i, with respect to the actual interval time z of inspection,a general mathematical formula for estimating the Markov transition probability can be defined:jl −1

π ij ( z ) = Prob[h(τ B ) = j | h(τ A ) = i ] = ∑∏l =i m =iλmλm − λlexp(−λl z ) ,

(7)

where
⎧ l −1 λm⎪∏ λ − λ = 1 (l = i )j l −1j l −1λm
λm j −1 λm⎪ m=i mlexp(−λl z ) = ∑∏exp(−λl z ) , and ⎨ j −1
.
∑∏
∏
λm
l = i m = i λm − λl m = l λm +1 − λll = i m = i λm − λl
⎪
=
1
(
l
=
j
)
⎪⎩∏
m = l λm +1 − λlTransition probability from condition state i to absorbing condition state I is eventually defined in the following equation:
I −1

π iI ( z ) = 1 − ∑π ij ( z ) (i = 1,L , I − 1) .
j =i

4. Local Mixture Hazard Model(1) Markov transition probability and heterogeneity factor- 103 -

(8)

In reality, it is hard to grant a homogeneous sampling population in monitoring data. To express the inhomogeneous sampling
population, a great deal of research in reliability engineering and operations research employs the term "heterogeneity factor". In
PMS, it is assumed that the entire network of roads consists of total K groups of roads. The grouping classification is often basedon the differences in technology. In each group k(k=1,…,K), the total of road sections are Sk. The heterogeneity factor of anindividual group is denoted as εk, which infers the change of hazard rate of condition state i(i=1,…,I-1) with respect to thepavement section sk(sk=1,…,Sk). With this assumption, the formula of hazard function in equation (3) can be expressed by meansof the mixture form:
λi k = λ%i k ε k (i = 1,L , I − 1; k = 1,L , K ; sk = 1,L , Sk ) .
s

s

(9)

It is noted that the value of heterogeneity factor εk is always non-negative. In addition, if the value of heterogeneity factor εk ofgroup k is higher than that of other groups, the group k certainly exerts to have a faster deterioration than other groups. Within one
group (or one technology), the hazard rate of all condition states share a same value of heterogeneity factor εk. Within a network ofroads categorized by several groups, the distribution of heterogeneity factor εk reflects the influence of individual group on theoverall deterioration of the entire network. Depending of the nature characteristics of each road network system, the heterogeneity
factor can be defined as in the form of a function or a stochastic variable.
For measurable representation, the value of εk(k=1,…,K) is described by vector ε k , with the bar

indicating the measurable

value. As a result, the survival probability function in equation (4) can be further expressed by means of the mixture hazard rate inequation (9):F%i ( yik ) = exp(−λ%i ε k yik ) .

(10)

Similarly, the Markov transition probability expressed in equations (6) and (7) can be further defined as

π iik ( z k : ε k ) = exp(−λ%ik ε k z k ) ,jj −1

π ijk ( z k : ε k ) = ∑∏l =i m=i

λ%mk

(11)

j

exp(−λ%lk ε k z k ) = ∑ψ ijl ( λ% k ) exp(−λ%lk ε k z k ) ,kλ%mk − λ%l

(12)

l =i

where

λ%mk

j −1

ψ ijl ( λ% k ) = ∏m =i

λ% − λ%lk
k
m

.

(13)

A great deal of past research has revealed the difficulties in defining the heterogeneity factor εk. The assumption of theheterogeneity factor to be in the form of a function or a stochastic variable crucially depends on the characteristics of the systemitself and the availability of monitoring data 5), 11). This paper focuses on applying mixture model in the case that the value
distribution of heterogeneity factor εk has a small dispersion. In other words, the departure of heterogeneity factor εk fromhomogeneity is in a small scale. This type of mixture model is named as the local mixture model. In exponential family form f(x; ε)(where x and ε are the variable and heterogeneity respectively), local mixing mechanism is defined via its mean parameterizationμk:rg ( x; μ ) := f ( x; ε ) + ∑ f k ( x; ε )

where

i=2

δ
k
f ( x; ε ) =

k

δε k

f ( x; ε ) .

(14)

Expansion of functions in equations (14) can be seen to follow the Taylor series. Since the likelihood function of Markov
transition probability in (14) belongs to the exponential family. It is possible to approximate the transition probability as in the formof the local mixture distribution.
∞

π%ij ( z ) = ∫ π ij ( z : ε ) f (ε )d ε (i = 1,L , I − 1) .
0

(15)

For convenience of mathematical manipulation, the local mixture transition probability is assumed as an exponential function
fmix(ε,z,λ), with mix indicating the abbreviation of mixture. As the sequent, the mixture function fmix(ε,z,λ) can be described by- 104 -

means of standard function f(ε,z,λ) and distribution H(ε). Equation (15) is further simplified asf mix (ε , z , λ ) = ∫ f (ε , z , λ )dH (ε ) ,(16)

where f(ε,z,λ) = exp(-ελz). Function f(ε,z,λ) is likely a function of ε about its mean. Without no loss of generality, and as long as
the mean exist, we can further decompose equation (14) as follows:(ε − 1) 2(−λ z ) 2 + ...) .
(17)
2!
This is the Taylor series. And thus, the quadratic form (when r = 2) is acceptable for an accurate approximation. Consequently,
an explicit form of approximation can be derived for the Markov transition probability:exp(−ελ z ) = e − λ z (1 + (ε − 1)(−λ z ) +(σλ z ) 2},2
(σλ%i z ) 2− λ% zπ%ii ( z ) = e i {1 +},2!

E (e −ελ z ) ≈ e − λ z {1 +andj

π%ij ( z ) = ∑ψ ijl ( λ )e l {1 +− λ% z

l =i

(18)
(19)

(σλ%l z ) 2} (i=1,…,I-1;j=i+1,…,I).
2!

(20)

(2) Likelihood estimation approach
The estimation of Markov transition probability and heterogeneity factor require monitoring data from at least two visualinspections. Supposing that the periodical monitoring data of Sk road sections is available. An inspection sample sk (a road section)
implies two consecutive discrete periodical inspections at times τ Ak and τ B k = τ Ak + z k , with its respective condition statessh(τ Ak ) = ish(τ B k ) = j
s

and

.

Based

on

monitoring

s

data

s

of

s

∑ S
K

k =1 ksamples,dummyvariableδ ij k (i = 1,L , I − 1, j = i,L , I ; sk = 1,L , S K ; k = 1,L , K ) is defined to satisfy the following conditions:s⎧⎪1

δ ij k = ⎨sh(τ Ak ) = i, h(τ B k ) = jss⎪⎩0 Otherwise

.

(21)

The range of dummy variable (δ11k ,L , δ I −k1, I ) is denoted by using the dummy variable vector δ k . Furthermore, structuralssscharacteristics and environment conditions of the road are expressed by means of characteristic variable vector
s

s

s

s

x k = ( x1 k ,L , xMk ) , with xmk (m = 1,L , M ) indicating the observed value of variable m for sample sk. The first variable issreferred as a constant term, with its value x1 k = 1 . Thus, the information concerning monitoring data of sample k can be describedas Ξ k = (δ k , z k , x k ) .
s

s

s

s

The hazard rate of condition state i of sample sk can be expressed by using mixture hazard function

λis ( yis ) = λ%is ε k (i = 1,L , I − 1) , with I as the absorbing condition state satisfying the conditions π IIk = 1 and λ%I k = 0 . The
k

k

s

k

s

s
hazard rate λ%i k (i = 1,L , I − 1; sk = 1,L , Lk ) depends on the characteristic vector of the road section, and is described asfollows:

λ%i k = x k β 'i ,
s

s

(22)

where βi = (βi,1,…,βi,M) is a row vector of unknown parameters βi,m(m=1,…,M), and the symbol ` indicates the vector istransposed. From equations (19) and (20), the standard hazard rate of respective condition states can be expressed by means ofshazard rate λ%i k (i = 1,L , I − 1; sk = 1,L , Lk ) and heterogeneity parameter εk. The average Markov transition probability can be- 105 -

sexpressed in equation (20), with consideration of characteristic variable x k . In addition, the transition probability depends on
inspection interval z k . As a result, transition probability πij can be expressed as a function of measurable monitoring datas

( z k , x k ) and unknown parameter θ = ( β 1,L , β I −1, σ ) as π%ijk ( z k , x k :θ ) . If the deterioration of road sections lk in the
s

s

s

s

s

entire LK samples are assumed to be mutually independent, the likelihood function expressing the simultaneous probability densityof the deterioration transition pattern for all inspection samples is defined 14), 15):
I −1

I

Sk

K

{

}

L(θ ,Ξ ) = ∏∏∏∏ π%ijk ( z k , x k :θ )i =1 j = i k =1 sk =1

s

s

s

s

δ ij k.

(23)

In view of the local mixture distribution with Taylor series, the Markov transition probability can be further described as

π%iik ( z sk , x k :θ ) = essj

π%ij ( z k , x k :θ ) = ∑ψ ijl ( λ )ess

(σ k x sk β 'i z sk ) 2
},
2!
s

s
s
− x k β 'i z k

{1 +

s
s
− x k β 'l z k(σ k x sk β 'l z sk ) 2
},
2!

(24)

s

{1 +

l =i

(25)

where ψ ijs (λ% lk ) is expressed in equation (13). Since δ ijsk , z sk , x sk can be obtained from monitoring data, the likelihood function
in equation (23) are the function of θ ( β , σ ) . To estimate the values of parameter θ = ( βˆ , σˆ ) , the method of maximum
likelihood is used. For computational convenience, the likelihood function can be further expressed by means of logarithm:ln L(θ ,Ξ ) = ∑ i =1 ∑ j =1∑ k =1∑ s k =1δ ij k π%ijk ( z k , x k :θ ) .
I −1

I

K

S

s

s

s

s

(26)

k

The value of parameter θ can be obtained by solving the optimality conditions:∂ ln L(θ ,Ξ )
= 0,
∂θ i

(i = 1,L , ( I − 1) M + 1) .

(27)

The optimal values of parameter θ = (θˆ1 ,L , θˆ( I −1) M +1 ) can be estimated by applying numerical iterative procedure such as
Newton Method for (I-1)M+1 order nonlinear simultaneous equations16). Furthermore, the estimator for the asymptotic covariancematrix Σ (θ ) of the parameters is given by−1⎡ ∂ 2 ln L(θ ,Ξ ) ⎤Σ (θ ) = ⎢⎥ .
⎣ ∂θ ∂θ ' ⎦(28)

The ((I-1)M+1)((I-1)M+1) order inverse matrix of the right-hand side of the formula in equation (28), composed by elements∂ 2 ln L(θ ,Ξ )/∂θ i ∂θ j , results to be the inverse matrix of the Fisher information matrix.

Information concerning inspection sample sk of the road group k is denoted as ζsk(sk=1,…,Sk). To describe the condition states ofindividual sample, the first and second condition states of sample sk are assumed as i(sk) and j(sk). It is supposed that the value ofparameter θ = ( β 1,L , β I −1, σˆ ) is available. If we consider the distribution of heterogeneity factor εk in function f (ε : σˆ ) , theprobability density function, which infers the transition pattern of sample ζsk , can be defined as:
s

s

s

s

s
i ( sk ) j ( sk )δ kρ k (ε k :θ ,ξ k ) = {π i (ksk ) j ( sk ) ( z k , x k : β , ε k )}f (ε k , σˆ ) ,(29)

where function f (ε : σˆ ) follows local mixing mechanism as previously described. As for the total number of samples in- 106 -

group k, the probability density function concerning the simultaneous occurrence of transition can be further defined as
Sk

Sk

j(s )

s

k

k

k

s

k

s

s

k

s
i ( sk ) j ( sk )δ kl
ρ k (ε k :θ ,ξ k ) = ∏ s =1ρ k (ε k :θ ,ξ k ) ∝ ∏ s =1{∑ l = i k( s ψ( λ k (θ )) exp(−λ%l k (θ )ε k z k )}) i(s ) j(s )S⎧⎪ (σλ%lsk z sk ) 2 ⎫⎪ k
⎨1 +
⎬ .
2!
⎩⎪
⎭⎪

(30)

The standard or average hazard rate is expressible by means of vector λ k (θ ) = (λ%1 k (θ ),L , λ%I −k1 (θ )) . With this assumption,
s

s

s

s
the value of average hazard rate λ%i k depends on the value of parameter θ. To come up with an explicit form of the probability

density function in equation (30), we apply partial logarithm as follows:Skj ( sk )ln ρ k (ε k :θ ,ξ k ) ∝ ∑δ i ( ks ) j ( s ) ln{ ∑ ψ il( s ) j ( s ) ( λ k (θ )) exp( −λ%l k (θ )ε k z k )} + Sk ln{1 +
sk =1

s

k

k

l = i ( sk )

s

k

k

s

s

s
s
(σλ%l k z k ) 2
}.
2!

(31)

By maximizing equation (31), the optimal value of heterogeneity factor ε k (k = 1,L , K ) can be obtained:kkk
max{ln ρ (ε :θ ,ξ )}

(32)

εk

(3) Benchmarking flow chart
The objective of benchmarking study is to search for the best pavement technology among the existing ones. Based on themethodology proposed in the previous sections, we summarize a road map of benchmarking application in Figure 1 . It is notedthat the technique for cost evaluation is simply a comparison of construction and repair cost, which is supposed to spend when thecondition state of the road section reaching its absorbing condition state.
4. Empirical Study and Benchmarking(1) Overview
In this section, we exploit the applicability of the exponential hazard model to estimate the Markov transition probability. Further,
the heterogeneity factor of individual road group is estimated by using the local mixture model. Benchmarking study is highlighted
with the comparison of deterioration curves. Empirical application is conducted on the monitoring data of the national road system
in Vietnam. There are over 10,000 samples in the database. Each sample represents a road section of 1 km in length. Afterverification, a sampling population during the period from 2001 to 2004 with 6510 road sections is selected for the empirical test.
Information of monitoring data includes the values of indexes such as: International Roughness Index (IRI), Cracking, Texture
depth, Thickness of top asphalt layer, Annual traffic volume, etc. The locations of examined road sections are mapped in Figure 2.
In benchmarking study, we consider the deterioration of top surface layers characterizing by type of materials, technicalspecification, and regional differences. Whilst, the traffic volume and texture depth are considered as characteristic variables. A
main reason of the selection is because of having a wide range of choices in the practices of design, construction, and maintenancein Vietnam. In other words, most of pavement technologies are borrowed technologies from developed nations, causing apavement system of inhomogeneous conditions. The problem of having inhomogeneous conditions in the national pavement
system consequently results in a negative influence on maintenance, repair, and renovation. The problem has been documented asa major difficulty for budget allocation either in short or long term strategy.
The original set of monitoring data is filtered and verified in order to define an appropriate range of condition states. Verificationis necessary since the range of condition states can be converted in various domains from the value of distress. In fact, the values of
distress such as Roughness, Cracking, Flatness, and Rut are measured and recorded in a very small scale. Thus, the requirement for
defining the range is extremely important. Based on the results of data verification, we realize that the arrival time to the worst
condition state are in similar behaviors if different range of condition states are assumed. Hence, for the convenience of observationand computation, we select the range of condition states from 1 to 5 as detailed described in Table 1. The range of condition states
is converted values from the value of IRI.

- 107 -StartData collection& Verification( at least 2 inspection times)
IRI, cracking, rut, texture, traffic
volume, structural thickness,ravelling, etc.

34

4D
4a
10

2

Northeast region

3
1B

279

37
379
37

Condition state
definition
Converted value fromperformance index such as: IRI,
cracking..

Northwest
region

21

3
18

32

6

1

Hanoi
1

i (i=1,...,I)

47
7Grouping
Categorizing road sections into
various sub-group k based on the
differences in technical design,material, structure, functionality,
topography, location, etc.

North Centerregion15

Benchmarking objective

Asphalt concrete

Total number of groups: K
Markov chain model
Estimating average or standardtransition probability, hazard rateand deterioration curve. Analyzing
the impact of characteristic
variables

Construction cost,
maintenance andrepair cost

Bituminous surface
treatment

Hue
16
14

Bituminous penetrated
macadam
ε 1 , λi1 , π ij1

λ%i , π%ij

14ESouth Centerregion

HCM

Local Mixture Model
Extracting heterogeneity factor foreach group of roadsεkk (k=1,...,K)

Centralhighlands

ε 2 , λi2 , π ij2
ε k , λik , π ijk

24

25

Cost
Evaluation

26

27

...

13
1K

ε K , λiK , π ijK

HCMC
91

20
56

30
50

Select the best technology (group k*)
80
53South region(Mekong delta andsoutheast coast)

End

Figure 2: Locations of roads.

Figure 1: Benchmarking flowchart.

(2) Estimation results
In the empirical study, we consider the annual traffic volume of motorized car and the change of texture index as characteristic
variables, with denotations as xi2 and xi3 . While, the first characteristic variable xi1 equals to 1 as a constant value. The thickness ofpavement is not considered in the estimation because it shares a similar range of value in design practices.
Estimation results using the exponential Markov model are displayed in Table 2. It is highlighted from the table that the traffic
volume has a great influence on the transition of condition state 4. A strong correlation between the transition condition state 2 andthe texture depth is also realized. As a matter of fact, the change in the texture depth of road depends on the traffic volume andother environmental conditions such as climate and construction materials. The figures displayed in the parenthesis represent thestatistical t-test for the values of unknown parameters.
Eventually, we obtain the values of hazard rate and life expectancy for condition state I through application of the conventional
Markov hazard model of Tsuda et al 3). Results are presented in Table 3. It is highlighted that, in average, the life expectancy ofcondition state i=1 lasts less than 1.5 years before entering into condition state i=2. Condition states 2 has its service life about 5.5
years. After entering condition state i=3, the speed of deterioration accelerates in a fast manner. For instance, condition state 3
remains only about 4.5 years before falling to condition state i=4. And further, it takes less than 3.5 years for condition state i=4
arriving to the absorbing condition state (i=5).
The matrix of Markov transition probability, estimated by using the exponential Markov model, is displayed in Table 4. The
values of transition properties are estimated based on the value of average hazard rate, which represents the deterioration transition
pattern of the entire road sections. In order to compare the influence of traffic volume on the deterioration, we carry out theestimations for three cases. The benchmark (BM) case refers to the case that we estimated the hazard rates and transition
probability based on annual traffic volume. Whilst, other two cases consider the increase and decrease of annual traffic volume at
the rate 0.5. Comparative results of three cases are illustrated in Figure 3.

- 108 -

Table 1: Description of condition states.

Table 2: Exponential hazard model results.

Condition states
Range of IRI values
Remark1(1-2]
Very good
2
(2-4]
Good
3
(4-6]
Fair
4
(6-8]
Poor
5
>8
Very poor
Note) IRI is measured in (m/km). IRI stands for International Roughness Index.

Conditionstates1E[θi ]

β i1

0.7987(46.633)20.0040(0.5470)30.2250(29.629)40.0849(5.8440)Note) t-values are shown in the parenthesis

Traffic volume

Texture depth

3.0108(5.9501)

1.9633(21.042)
-

βi 2

βi 3

Table 4: Markov transition probability.

Table 3: Life expectancy of condition states.
Condition states

Constant term

E[ RMDik ] (year)

1
0.79871.2521
20.18355.448830.22524.440140.2901
3.4474Note) Values of hazard rate and life expectancy were not defined for absorbing
condition state (i=5) . E is abbreviation for expected average value. RMD stands
for Remaining Duration, which is defined in the paper of Tsuda et al 3).

Condition
Condition states
States123
10.44990.49650.04952
0.0
0.83230.14963
0.0
0.0
0.7983
4
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
0.0
0.0
0.0
Note) Interval of transition is one year.

40.00380.01640.17410.74820.0

50.00030.00170.02760.25181.0

An appealing conclusion from Figure 3 is that the traffic volume particularly exerts to have a high impact on condition state 4.
In fact, it is true to accept that the traffic volume should affect all the condition states with different severe levels. However, in orderto understand its behavior precisely, a richer database of monitoring data is required. Despite the limitation of monitoring data, weare still able to give an alarming message that the deterioration of the road network in Vietnam is progressing with a high speed ofdeterioration. The life expectancy of the surface layer in the network is relatively less than 13 years. Probabilistically, after about 6
years from construction time, the serviceability of the road network cannot satisfy the expectation of users. Thus, it is strongly
recommended that Vietnamese road administration should proposes an extensive investigation to find out the causes of highdeterioration speed, and works out a suitable plan to prolong the service life of the entire road network.
(3) Benchmarking
In the benchmarking study, we categorize 6510 road sections into three groups according to the types of materials. In addition, we
further classify the group of asphalt concrete materials into seven smaller groups based on the technical class, lane class, road class,and functional class since this group accounts for a large number of samples in monitoring data. Thus, the total number of groups arenine, with the detailed description explained in Table 5. The locations of roads belonging to each group are also highlighted in
Figure 2. The estimation results for heterogeneity factor of individual group are given in Table 5. The distribution of heterogeneity
factor around the mean is plotted in Figure 4.
A comparison of deterioration curves is drawn in Figure 5. The figure shows the deterioration curves of roads based on 3 typesof materials. The group of roads with asphalt overlays has a longest service life (about 16 years). Meanwhile, the two other groups ofroads with materials composing of bituminous penetrated macadam and bituminous surface treatment have their service life lessthan 9 years. Since asphalt concrete becomes a popular material for overlay, most of national roads are now paved with asphalt
concrete. Thus, we further classified the group of asphalt concrete into 7 sub-groups and compared their deterioration curves. In total,
there are nine groups of roads for benchmarking. Figure 6 presents the a comparative view on the deterioration curves of 9 groups.
It is realized that deterioration curves of asphalt concrete surfaces has a small dispersion in compare with other groups. Relatively,
the life expectancy of asphalt concrete surfaces ranges from 12 to 16 years.
According to the climate zones of Vietnam, road sections with asphalt concrete overlay are classified into 6 regions. The location ofeach region is also displayed in the map of Figure 2. A comparative view of the deterioration curves of asphalt roads according toregional classification are illustrated in Figure 7. As can be seen from Figure 7, it is proved that the deterioration of road surfaces inthe southern part is faster than that of road surfaces in the northern regions. This reason could possibly due to the effects of soft
ground condition in the southern part of Vietnam or the impact of flooding in low land areas. The two prominent reasons arestrongly believed to cause the subsidence of construction works in the southern part of the country. The deterioration of roadsurfaces in the north part of the country has a slower speed than the that of the other regions. Moreover, it is also found that that thedeterioration speed of road surfaces in urban areas is faster than that in the highland regions. The faster deterioration speed in theurban areas is due to the effects of heavier traffic volume annually.

- 109 -Elapsed time (years)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1

1.670

1.600

TV(increas e 2 times)

1.400

TV (decrease 2 times )2
Condition states

1.800
1.687

BMcase

1.215

1.200

1.089

1.000
3

0.854

0.800

0.892

0.871
0.799

0.741

0.600
4

0.400
0.200

5

0.000
0

1

2

3 3.2
4
3.1

5
3.3

6
3.4

7
3.5

8
3.6

9 Group10
3.7

Figure 4: Distribution of heterogeneity factors.

Figure 3: Deterioration curves (TV is traffic volume).

Table 5: Classification of road groups.
Group
k
1
2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7

Description

Technical
class
60
60
40
60
60
60
60
80
60

Lane
class
3+4
1+3 +4
4
3
3
3
3
3
4

Road
class
1
1+2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1

Functional
class
3
3+4+5
4
2
3
4
3
2
3

Heterogeneity
factorBituminous penetrated macadam (226)1.687
Bituminous surface treatment (1301)
1.670
Asphalt concrete overlay (713)0.741Asphalt concrete overlay (1047)
1.215
Asphalt concrete overlay (1030)
0.854
Asphalt concrete overlay (467)0.892Asphalt concrete overlay (602)0.871Asphalt concrete overlay (1025)
0.799
Asphalt concrete overlay (99)1.089
Benchmark case (BMcase-6510)
1.000Note) Figures in parenthesis shows number of data. Technical class is defined by maximum allowance speed used in design. Lane class is categorized in the range(1-single lane with width <=3.5m; 2-3 lanes with width of 10-14.5 m; 3-2 lanes with width of 3.5-5.5 m; 4-2 lanes with width of 5.5-10.5m; 5- 4 lanes with width >=14m). Road class 1 refers to main track of national roads, 2 is supplement track of national roads. Functional class refers to management level 17). Group 1 and 2 areclassified with combination of several designated factor.

(4) Cost evaluation
In view of economic evaluation, a simple cost evaluation technique is applied. We assumed that whenever the condition state ofa road section reaching the absorbing state (i=5), renewal will be implemented. The total cost is a summation of construction costand renewal cost for renewing the overlay. With this assumption, the average cost of construction and renewal for each type of roadsurface according to its material can be estimated, simply by calculating the ratio of its total cost to its average life expectancy.
The results of cost estimation are presented in Table 6. The results highlight the fact that higher benefit can be earned if theasphalt concrete overlay is applied instead of applying the bituminous penetrated macadam and bituminous surface treatment
overlays. A significant difference in the life expectancy and average cost within the group of asphalt concrete material is also
realized from the estimation results in Table 6. Based on the obtained results, the best type of overlay for long term application canbe recommended. For example, group 3.1 in Table 6 is considered as the best one in term of economic perspective.
6. Conclusion and Recommendation

This paper has proposed a local mixture model for benchmarking study. The local mixture model is expressed by means ofheterogeneity factor ε that exists in each group of roads. The heterogeneity factor is considered to follow the function of Taylor
series. In order to estimate the heterogeneity factor, two steps estimation approach with maximum likelihood estimation method isapplied. The local mixture hazard model is considered as an excellent tool for benchmarking study, which is used to search for thebest technology in the pavement management system. In view of practical application, the methodology is suitable to apply in the
pavement management system of developing countries like Vietnam, where has a high demand of standardization in the pavement
system.

- 110 -Elapsed time (years)
0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

1

1
BMcaseBituminous p enetrated macadam (226)

Condition states

Condition states

2

Bituminous surface treatment (1301)
Asph alt con crete (4983)

2

3

3

4

5

6

7

Elapsed time (years)
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
BMcas eGroup 1

Group 2

Group 3.1

Group 3.2

Group 3.3

Group 3.4

Group 3.5

Group 3.6

Group 3.7

3

5

5

Figure 5: Deterioration curves-a compact view(3 groups).

Figure 6: Deterioration curves-a broaden view (9 groups).

Elapsed time (years)

Table 6: Cost evaluation.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

1

Condition states

2

4

4

2

1

Entire nation (ben chmark)North Center region (1319)
Northeast region (1249)
South region (648)South Center reg ion (536)Northwest region (311)Central highlands region (804)

3

4

5

Figure 7: Deterioration curves-regional perspective (6 regions).

Group
RenewalService
Averagek
costlife (years)
cost
1
8,567
7.64
1,121
2
8,929
7.72
1,157
3.1
11,754
17.38
676
3.2
11,754
10.61
1,108
3.3
11,754
15.09
779
3.4
11,754
14.45
814
3.5
11,754
14.79
795
3.6
11,754
16.12
729
3.7
11,754
11.84
993
Note) Monetary unit is 1000 thousand Vietnamese dong. Unit cost is referred to18), 19)
the standard cost defined by Hanoi construction bureau. Cost is estimatedfor 100 m2 and 5 cm in its thickness of overlays.

To demonstrate the applicability of the model, we conducted an empirical study on a database of Vietnamese pavement systemcollected during the years 2001 and 2004. The technological groups were classified according to the types of materials and regionalzones. The estimation results revealed a fact that the speed of deterioration of roads in Vietnam is very fast. Approximately 10
years after construction, the condition states of road surfaces reach the worst condition state. The main cause leading to the fast
deterioration is because of the high intensity of annual traffic volume. Furthermore, estimation results prove that the performancesof road surfaces with asphalt concrete are much better than that of the road surfaces with bituminous penetrated macadam andbituminous surface treatment. Based on a simple cost evaluation technique, the empirical study also recommended a best group ofroad surfaces with asphalt concrete for long term application.
However, we have not discussed several points, which will be considered as topics for extending this study in the future:a) The benchmarking study focused only on the pavement management system. However, its application can be applied to othertypes of infrastructure.
b) This paper proposed only a simple cost evaluation technique, which does not considered the routine maintenance and repair
actions. In order to overcome this limitation, a cost evaluation technique using the theory of Markov decision process should beapplied in the future extension of the model.
c) This paper has not discussed the problem of measurement errors in monitoring data, which is one of the main reason causing
the bias in estimation results. A future study shall consider the theory of hidden Markov models, Bayesian estimation, and Markov
Chain Monte Carlo(MCMC) method into account. In addition based upon MCMC method, Markov deterioration hazard model isable to be estimated more efficiently with expert’s emprical judgement at early stages, and reviced with the newly obtained data
through monitoring or inspections.
d) The empirical study of this paper just focused on a small scale application of benchmarking methodology on the pavement
system in Vietnam, particularly focusing on the types of materials and regional zones. However, in order to find out the best
pavement technology and to propose a feasible solution to the problems of pavement system in Vietnam, a better quality
monitoring data shall be accumulated.
e) In the empirical study, we considered only the annual traffic volume as a time-invariant characteristic variable. Actulally, atpresent, heavy traffic does not occur so often, and the traffic amount does not influence deterioration rate significantly. In- 111 -

this study, the authors propose a methodology for selecting appropriate technology, by producing a benchmark. In
developing nations, desirable pavement technology changes dynamically as economy advances. Therefore, it is important tocontinue efforts for seeking desirable pavement structures and develop a methodology for improving the benchmark,through the monitoring of the pavement deterioration state.
References
1) Leong, K.C.: The Essence of Asset Management - A Guide, United Nations Development Programe (UNDP), 2004.
2) Mishalani, R. and Madanat S.: Computation of infrastructure transition probabilities using stochastic duration models, ASCE
Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol.8, No.4, 2002.
3) Tsuda, Y., Kaito, K., Aoki, K. and Kobayashi, K.: Estimating Markovian transition probabilities for bridge deterioration
forecasting, Journal of Structural Engineering and Earthquake Engineering (Japan Society of Civil Engineers), Vol.23(2),pp.241-256, 2006.
4) Lee, T.C., Judge, G.G., and Zellner, A.: Estimating the Parameter of the Markov Probability Model from Aggregate Time
Series Data, North Holland, 1970.
5) Lancaster, T.: The Econometric Analysis of Transition Data, Cambridge University Press, 1990.
6) Shahin, M.: Pavement Management for Airports, Roads, and Parking Lots, Springer, 2005.
7)Madanat, S., Mishalani, R., and Ibrahim, W. H. W.: Estimation of Infrastructure Transition Probabilities from Condition Rating
Data, Journal of Infrastructure Systems, Vol.1(2), pp.120-125, 1995.
8) Shin, H.C., and Madanat, S.M.: Development of stochastic model of pavement distress initation, Journal of Infrastructure
Planning and Maangement (Japan Society of Civil Engineers),Vol.744, pp.61-67, 2003.
9) Blossfeld, H-P., and Mamerle, A.: Unobserved heterogeneity in event history models, Quality and Quantity, Vol.26(2),pp.157-168, 1992.
10) Kaito, K. Obama, K. and Kobayashi, K.: Random Proportional Weibull Hazard Model and Its Application to a Traffic Control
Systems, 10th International Conference on Application of Advanced Technologies in Transportation, Athens, Greece, 2008.
11) Karim, A.I. and Paul, M.:Local mixtures of the exponential distribution, Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics,
Vol.59(1), pp.111-134, 2007.
12) Nam, L.T., Obama, K., and Kobayashi, K.: Local mixtures hazard model: A semi-parametric approach to risk management inpavement system, IEEE International conference on Systems, Man and Cybermetics, SMC 2008, pp.2291-2296, 2008.
13) Gourieroux, C.: Econometrics of Qualitative Dependent Variables, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
14) Tobin, J.: Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables, Econometrica, Vol.26, pp.24-36, 1958.
15) Amemiya, T. and Boskin, M.: Regression analysis when the dependent variables is truncated log-normal, with an application
to the determination of the duration of welfare dependency, International Economic Review, Vol.15, pp.485, 1974.
16) Isota, K. and Ono, Y. Handbook of Numerical Methods, Omu Ltd., 1990 (in Japanese).
17) TCVN-4054: Highway Specifications for Design, Vietnamese Standards Handbook, 2005.
18) DG24: Guide Book on Unit Cost for Construction Work: Civil Part, Hanoi People Committee, pp.108-123, 2008.
19) DM1242: Guide Book on Norm for Construction Work: Civil Part, Construction Economic Institute of Vietnam, pp.185-200,
1998.

The Benchmarking Approach to Pavement Management: Lessons From VIETNAM *by Le Thanh NAM ** , Nguyen Dinh THAO***, Kiyoyuki KAITO**** and Kiyoshi KOBAYASHI*****
This paper presents an analytical methodology to obtain heterogeneity factor of individual pavement technological groupbased on local mixing mechanism. Furthermore, a benchmarking approach for selecting the best possible technology forstandardization and long term application is proposed. Special focus is on benchmarking of pavement management system indeveloping countries, where the best possible option of pavement design and management has not generally standardized yet.
Empirical study was conducted on the dataset of highway system in Vietnam for testing the applicability of the model.
Estimation results demonstrate a high feasibility of benchmarking application to utilize the model in real practices.

- 112 -