Framework for Modeling On-Site Productivity of Preventive Maintenance Activities for Wastewater Collection Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preventive maintenance of drainage networks is an essential component of urban infrastructure management. Large cities require significant budgetary and other resources to perform the necessary prescheduled cleaning and flushing activities at various locations around the city at regular intervals. However, planning and scheduling of these activities can be challenging because of the wide variation of actual on-site flushing duration, which depends on a number of factors such as location, properties of the pipes, frequency of flushing, time of day, and season. This study develops a model for estimating the on-site duration of high pressure flushing (HPF), based on such predictor variables. The model is developed and validated using historical data from the City of Edmonton, where 5,500 km of network is maintained through more than 1,400 prescheduled preventive maintenance locations for HPF. The panel data set utilized in this study is obtained by integrating several databases, one of which is the historical data collected by the global positioning system (GPS) device installed in the flushing trucks. The framework presented here first uses ordered probit analysis to estimate the probability of a number of stops to flush a given set of pipes and then forecasts the flushing duration by means of a multiple regression model. This approach is applicable for similar municipalities and can be effectively used for resource optimization, maintenance scheduling, sensitivity analysis, and performance evaluation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".