MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973784459 · doi:10.1115/ipc2010-31557

Application of Reliability Based Design and Assessment to Seismic Evaluations

2010· article· en· W1973784459 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Pipeline transportReliability engineeringPipeline (software)Seismic analysisStructural engineeringComputer scienceFinite element methodSoil liquefactionLiquefactionEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of reliability based design and assessment (RBDA) as a basis for seismic evaluations of natural gas pipelines is explored through analysis of a number of representative pipeline examples. To accomplish this, a simplified approach was developed to generate a representative probability distribution of permanent ground deformations due to soil liquefaction. An idealized pipeline alignment through a liquefiable layer under a river was defined, and a number of cases representing NPS12 and NPS36 pipelines in classes 1, 2 and 3 were analyzed using a finite element model. The probability of exceeding the strain limits for pipe body and girth weld were calculated and compared to the reliability targets. The results were used to identify diameter and class combinations that can meet the reliability targets, and to make preliminary conclusions regarding the viability of using RBDA for seismic evaluations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it