MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991066010 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0144

Survey of pressure management in water distribution systems

2014· article· en· W1991066010 on OpenAlexaff
Minhua Xu, Jian Yang, David M. Hughes, Mark W. LeChevallier

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAmerican Water (Canada)
FundersWater Research Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePressure systemSampling intervalInterval (graph theory)Pressure measurementStatisticsMathematicsMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A survey was conducted to assess pressure management practices in water distribution systems. Most of the surveyed utilities agreed on the need to avoid low‐pressure episodes (< 20 psi). However, 56% of the utilities had no requirements for the maximum pressure delivered to customers, and 67% did not manage peak pressures in their systems. Only 13% of surveyed systems conducted pressure monitoring at critical locations—e.g., sites of highest or lowest pressure. Approximately 50% of systems reported at least one occurrence of negative pressure during the previous year; however, many more incidents of low and/or negative pressure may have gone undetected. The authors recommend that distribution system pressures be monitored in at least two locations in each pressure zone, representing the highest and lowest pressures. The recording interval could be set to 5–10 min with a 10‐s sampling interval. Impulse recording (when available) should be enabled to capture momentary pressure changes.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207