## 3 Results and discussion
### Self-Snow-Melting Test
#### 3.1.4 Regression Analysis of Snow Melting Effect  
The profile in Figure 8 was regressed following the model (\(y=ax+b\), where \(x\) is the time; \(y\) is the melting quality of snow with the use of V-260; \(a\) and \(b\) are coefficients) and the regression formula and the determination coefficient (\(R^{2}\)) are listed in Table 12. The determination coefficients reflect that the regression is reliable.  
All the regression results in Table 12 show a significant linear relationship between time and the mass of melted snow. On the other hand, with the increase of temperature, the melting rate was 2-3 times increased under the same snowfall intensity. At the same temperature, the melting rate varied slightly under different snow intensities, consistent with the results in Section 3.1.1.  
Moreover, IGD was also selected as the anti-icing filler for validating the above-described regression results. The experiments were conducted following the gradation in Section 2.2.1 (4.8% asphalt-aggregate ratio, 5.0% mass ratio of IGD to asphalt mixture, and 5.0% mineral powder). The experimental results are shown in Figure 15, and the regression results are shown in Equations (8)  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Temp. (\({}^{\circ}\)C)** & **Blizzard** & **Heavy Snow** & **Moderate Snow** & **Light Snow** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(-15\)} & \(Y=0.3945\times X-0.4067\) & \(Y=0.2481\times X-0.1905\) & \(Y=0.2016\times X-0.1743\) & \(Y=0.1812\times X+0.0119\) \\  & \(R^{2}=0.9794\) & \(R^{2}=0.9767\) & \(R^{2}=0.9896\) & \(R^{2}=0.9931\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(-10\)} & \(Y=0.9108\times X+10.981\) & \(Y=0.7427\times X+10.24\) & \(Y=0.4408\times X+10.496\) & \(Y=0.5728\times X-0.2904\) \\  & \(R^{2}=0.9685\) & \(R^{2}=0.8598\) & \(R^{2}=0.978\) & \(R^{2}=0.9976\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(-5\)} & \(Y=3.1771\times X-0.9438\) & \(Y=0.5817\times X+12.759\) & \(Y=0.9016\times X+8.9885\) & \(Y=1.06\times X+7.66\) \\  & \(R^{2}=0.9779\) & \(R^{2}=0.9988\) & \(R^{2}=0.9248\) & \(R^{2}=0.7721\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(0\)} & \(Y=6.5769\times X+5.4\) & \(Y=4.3533\times X+17.433\) & \(Y=3.2971\times X+18.327\) & \(Y=1.06\times X+7.66\) \\  & \(R^{2}=0.9832\) & \(R^{2}=0.9381\) & \(R^{2}=0.8165\) & \(R^{2}=0.7721\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\(5\)} & \(Y=10.112\times X+8.8964\) & \(Y=9\times X+7.66\) & \multirow{2}{*}{-} & \multirow{2}{*}{-} \\  & \(R^{2}=0.9857\) & \(R^{2}=0.9808\) & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 12: Regression formula between melting quality and times of anti-icing asphalt mixture.  
Figure 14: The effect of different temperatures on the melting quality of snow at different snowfall intensity.  
and (9). The melting rate also corresponds with the linear relationship, and the melting rate of the above two temperatures has a nearly twofold relationship. Besides, the snow melting performance of anti-icing asphalt mixture with IGD is approximate to that of anti-icing asphalt mixture with V-260 in a short term.  
\[y=0.9125x+1.0581\ (R^{2}=0.9375)\ (\mathrm{at}-10\ ^{\circ}\mathrm{C}) \tag{8}\]  
\[y=0.5086x+0.5058(R^{2}=0.9547)\ (\mathrm{at}-15\ ^{\circ}\mathrm{C}) \tag{9}\]