Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Technology Focus We wear small bands on our fingers for many reasons. The rings have many meanings; the wedding ring may be the most common. This band, signifying no beginning or end, represents a union or reminds the wearer that he or she is married. It is traditionally worn on the left hand, on the vena amoris, the digit that the Romans believed was connected directly to the heart. Puzzle rings, or gimmel bands, are another type of ring used as wedding bands that has dual meanings. The word “gimmel” comes from the Latin gemellus and means “twin” or “paired.” Engaged couples would each wear one piece of the puzzle ring and, upon marriage, join the two bands with another provided by the priest. Once joined, the bands formed a puzzle that, if removed, was difficult to piece back together. Deceit that led to infidelity was made more difficult because the wearer might not be able to put the puzzle back together. Wedding rings have different traditions in eastern and western cultures, but they always hold a strong mental connection for the wearers. Rings also tie us to our accomplishments or recollections. School rings and championship rings can tie us to a collegiate career or a significant athletic accomplishment. The purpose of these rings is to remember. I have always been inspired by a tradition that many Canadian engineers have of wearing an iron ring. The ring is worn on the little finger of the engineer’s dominant hand so that, when writing or tasking with the dominant hand, the engineer is reminded of his or her obligations. The tradition holds that the iron in the ring came from a bridge that failed and cost many lives. The ring is small and is designed to be a constant reminder. The tradition continues when the engineer retires; the ring is returned to service as an “experienced ring.” Preventing failures in our field is imperative for safety and economic operation. Learning from these failures, properly documenting and remembering them, is important for avoiding catastrophes. We may engineer a process, a method, or a particular part to reduce failures and enhance operations. Solid-expandable-tubular technology is a fairly new technology that is gaining more promising and important applications in oil- and gas-wellbore design. Constant improvements to the deployment of this technology are increasing its reliability and number of applications. Heat treatment of the expansion-cone material used in an expanding tubular is one such modification. The drillpipe-connection phase of the drilling operation can be one of the greater opportunities for failures and mishaps. An improperly handled connection procedure can damage drillpipe; stick a drillstring; and, in the case of managed-pressure drilling, induce an unwanted influx. One of the selected papers reviews a database of drillpipe-connection damage, and another reviews a method for making connections in the managed-pressure environment. Recommended additional reading at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org. SPE 147747 Quantification of Drillstring-Integrity-Failure Risk Using Real-Time Vibration Measurements by Yezid Arevalo, Schlumberger, et al. SPE 146959 Stability Analysis of Pipe With Connectors in Horizontal Wells by Guohua Gao, Shell, et al. SPE 146344 Development of Ball-and-Pocket Gripping Technology To Overcome Slip Handling Limitations by Justin Jarski, Canrig Drilling Technology, et al. SPE 148516 Post-Expansion Characterization of Expandable Tubular: Progress and Challenges by T. Pervez, Sultan Qaboos University, et al.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,601 | 0,326 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».