# Evaluation of Construction Asphalt Pavements Based Toposable Set Theory: A Case Study
## 5 Discussion  
Firstly, from the perspective of research methods, the evaluation index system of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation adopted in the literature [18; 19; 20; 21] is a static attribute, the judgment matrix is inflexible, the weight determination is subjective, and the selection of index value is a set of real numbers. By contrast,  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Indexes**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**I**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**II**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**III**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**IV**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**V**} \\ \hline \(P_{i}\) & \(c_{i}\) & & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\(P_{1}\)} & \(c_{1}\) & \(-0.2667\) & \(0.2000\) & \(-0.0833\) & \(-0.3529\) & \(-0.4359\) \\  & \(c_{2}\) & \(-0.3878\) & \(-0.2105\) & \(0.4860\) & \(-0.2200\) & \(-0.5038\) \\  & \(c_{3}\) & \(0.0390\) & \(-0.0390\) & \(-0.3588\) & \(-0.5189\) & \(-0.5819\) \\  & \(c_{4}\) & \(-0.2619\) & \(0.1729\) & \(-0.0691\) & \(-0.3362\) & \(-0.5352\) \\  & \(c_{5}\) & \(-0.7875\) & \(-0.7167\) & \(-0.5750\) & \(-0.1500\) & \(0.1500\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\(P_{2}\)} & \(c_{6}\) & \(-0.3000\) & \(0.2500\) & \(-0.1250\) & \(-0.4167\) & \(-0.5625\) \\  & \(c_{7}\) & \(-0.3718\) & \(-0.1552\) & \(0.4500\) & \(-0.1833\) & \(-0.3875\) \\  & \(c_{8}\) & \(-0.4598\) & \(-0.3253\) & \(-0.1000\) & \(0.2994\) & \(-0.2063\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\(P_{3}\)} & \(c_{9}\) & \(-0.3611\) & \(-0.1154\) & \(0.3000\) & \(-0.2333\) & \(-0.4250\) \\  & \(c_{10}\) & \(-0.5250\) & \(-0.3667\) & \(-0.0500\) & \(0.1000\) & \(-0.3214\) \\  & \(c_{11}\) & \(-0.1941\) & \(0.3193\) & \(-0.3393\) & \(-0.5600\) & \(-0.6702\) \\  & \(c_{12}\) & \(0.1333\) & \(-0.1333\) & \(-0.5667\) & \(-0.7111\) & \(-0.7833\) \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\(P_{4}\)} & \(c_{13}\) & \(-0.2222\) & \(0.4000\) & \(-0.3000\) & \(-0.5333\) & \(-0.6500\) \\  & \(c_{14}\) & \(-0.3485\) & \(-0.0652\) & \(0.1500\) & \(-0.2833\) & \(-0.4625\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & \(c_{15}\) & \(-0.5875\) & \(-0.4500\) & \(-0.1750\) & \(0.3500\) & \(-0.2826\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & \(c_{16}\) & \(-0.2857\) & \(0.3333\) & \(-0.1667\) & \(-0.4444\) & \(-0.5833\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & \(c_{17}\) & \(-0.3810\) & \(-0.1875\) & \(0.4000\) & \(-0.1333\) & \(-0.3500\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 12: Correlation of evaluation indexes.  
the method adopted in this paper selects a set of real numbers, and the measured data is the interval point value of fuzziness, which can describe the variability of things, the quantitative change process and the degree of the qualitative change process. In addition, this paper considers using the extension interval value instead of the specific point value to construct the extension judgment matrix, which not only considers the subjectivity of expert judgment, but also combines the weight solution with the consistency test of the judgment matrix, thereby simplifying the calculation and overcoming the shortcomings of the rough calculation process and strong subjectivity of the traditional analysis method. Second, asphalt pavements construction is a complex process, and material, technology, personnel, and equipment all have influence on the quality of the asphalt; in addition, the environmental conditions, traffic load and the tension of tires and other adverse conditions, including the action of will, can cause irreversible deformation of asphalt pavement, affecting the service life of the asphalt road surface. Therefore, in the asphalt pavement construction control evaluation, many factors need to be considered, including quantitative and qualitative indicators, and there is a need to apply a new evaluation system to describe and deal with the construction control problem. However, literature [6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12] considers relatively single factors, which is insufficient to comprehensively and objectively analyze the construction quality of asphalt pavement.