MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study of the Suitability of Existing Deterioration Models for Water Mains

2009· article· en· W1986012101 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yong Wang, Osama Moselhi, Tarek Zayed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia University
KeywordsMains electricityElectricityEngineeringWater supplyCivil engineeringCategorizationForensic engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deterioration of water mains causes serious problems in major urban communities worldwide. This paper presents the findings of a recent study conducted on pipe-break data in an effort to identify and categorize the key factors that contribute to the deterioration of water mains and examine the applicability of existing deterioration models for water mains in representing actual field conditions. The data used in this paper were collected from a municipality that has a large water distribution network in Canada. The collected data cover 15-year pipe break records of 432km of water mains. Unlike the common thought by practitioners, the performed analysis reveals that water mains of long lengths do not necessarily have more breaks compared to those of short lengths. The analysis performed using existing models shows that they provide poor representation and inadequate explanation for the deterioration of water mains. The research findings presented in this paper are expected to be useful to academics and practitioners (municipal engineers, consultants, and contractors) in analyzing deterioration trends of water mains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Performance of Constructed FacilitiesSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207