MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008409871 · doi:10.4043/23734-ms

Pipeline Engineering Solutions for Harsh Arctic Environments: Technology Challenges and Constraints for Advanced Numerical Simulations

2012· article· en· W2008409871 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

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportComputer sciencePipeline (software)Marine engineeringSubmarine pipelineArcticSystems engineeringEngineeringGeologyMechanical engineeringOceanographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The design of offshore arctic pipelines must evaluate technical engineeringchallenges, primarily related to system demand and system capacity, and addressproject execution risk, primarily associated with pipeline trenching andlogisitics. One of the significant hazards, particularly in deeper water, isthe presence of extreme ice features; such as icebergs and multi-year pressureridges, that may gouge the seabed. A comprehensive engineering framework existsto support the analysis and design of offshore pipelines in ice gougeenvironments. However, there exists some aeas of technical uncertainty withinthe current state-of-practice that are highlighted in this paper. This studyfocuses on specific technical issues associated with the simulation of contactmechanics, definition of interface parameters, and need for physical datasetsfor the validation of advanced numerical simulation tools. Study specificconclusions and recommendations that address these technology needs to resolveuncertainty associated with the simulation of ice gouging events areprovided. Introduction Over the past decade, numerous studies have illustrated the simulationpotential of recent advancements in computational hardware and softwareplatforms to solve complex multi-physics problems involving large deformations, large strains and advanced constitutive models. For example, the ArbitraryLagrange Eulerian (ALE) modelling framework has been used to examine manypractical engineering problems such as ice gouging and ice/structureinteraction (e.g. Kenny et al., 2007; Konuk et al., 2005; 2009). Although theunderlying technical basis is sound and the innovative efforts are recognized, application of these advanced numerical procedures is ahead of the curve withrespect to the requisite benchmarks and validation (Pike et al., 2011a,b). Forice gouge events, there has been recent effort to address this issue (e.g. Panico et al., 2012; Phillips et al., 2010; Sancio et al., 2011); however, asshown in this study and others (e.g. Pike et al., 2011c; Rossiter and Kenny,2012), there is a need for a focused and collaborative effort in order toimprove confidence and reduce uncertainty in the numerical modelling proceduresthrough model validation (e.g. Panico et al., 2012; Phillips et al., 2010; Pikeet al., 2011a,b; Pike and Kenny, 2012a).

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.205 · 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