Bibliographic record
Abstract
Offshore installations are complex and expensive engineering structures that are unique in terms of their design and operational characteristics. Over the past three decades, there have been major advancements in the technology used to extract oil and gas, which has enabled exploration to extend to challenging and hostile environments, including the Troll field in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. The Sleipner platform was the first of three concrete gravity base structures to be used to extract oil and gas from this field, and great effort was placed on a timely start-up of gas deliveries in order to ensure the credibility of Norway as a reliable European energy partner. The gravity base structure (GBS) of the Sleipner platform was the twelfth in a series of GBS platforms of Condeep-type designed and built by the company Norwegian Contractors in Gandsfjorden near Stavanger, Norway. On August 23 1991, during a controlled ballasting operation in preparation for deck mating, the Sleipner platform sank. All 14 people onboard the platform was rescued by nearby boats without injuries. The failure involved a total economic loss of about 700 million dollars. Safety is a major concern for all offshore operations and a proper risk management plan is critical in ensuring a safe and successful project. Risk management involves the identification of hazards associated with a specified activity in order to minimize the probability of their occurrence, and/or mitigate their consequences. Risk management is particularly important in hostile ocean environments such as the North Sea, where even the most routine and simple tasks could result in great consequences should trouble strike. The following paper will discuss the sinking of the Sleipner A platform and explore the investigation that took place immediately following the disaster. The paper will also discuss the coastal facilities required to construct Condeep platforms, as well as the role of risk management in the process. Finally, the impact to subsequent offshore structures following the Sleipner platform sinking will be assessed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".