Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Six methods to test electrical isolation of pipeline casings at highway and railroad crossings are critically analyzed; some are field tested. Three of the methods give more qualitative indications of the casing status, and three give more quantitative measures with data interpretation. The latter three methods, namely on and off pipe and casing potential, annulus resistance, and forced depolarization, may give accurate indications when the casing is electrically isolated or metallically shorted. However, none of the test methods reviewed appears to determine unambiguously the presence of an electrolytically shorted casing, except by deduction from the extremes of an isolated casing and a metallically shorted casing. Moreover, the methods can neither determine a metallically shorted casing with electrolyte present in the annulus nor assess the level of protection on the carrier pipe in the casing with an electrolyte present in the annulus. Despite the limitations of the methods, a low frequency of occurrence of corrosion with cased and/or shorted pipelines has been observed, due possibly in part to timely recognition and remediation of shorted casings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".