MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012370118 · doi:10.1139/l06-162

Factors contributing to the failure of asbestos cement water mains

2007· article· en· W2012370118 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yafei Hu, D W Hubble

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMains electricityEnvironmental scienceWater supplyAsbestos cementCementEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringAsbestosMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asbestos cement (AC) water mains were installed extensively in North America, Europe, and Australia from the late 1920s to the early 1980s and still form a significant component of water distribution networks of many cities. These water mains are ageing and some water systems have experienced a high breakage rate in AC mains in recent years. It is essential that a clear understanding be developed of the factors contributing to their failure to ensure that municipalities and water authorities can manage their AC water-main assets. In this paper, the historical failure data of AC water mains from the City of Regina were collected and correlated with their corresponding environmental setting, including soil type, water quality, climate, and construction and maintenance practices. The predominant factors that influence the AC pipe breaks were identified. It was observed that pipe age, diameter, climate, clay soil, and construction and maintenance methods all influence the failure of AC water mains in the city, with climate and clay soil conditions being the two critical factors. Some chemical attack from the conveyed water and soil pore water may have occurred and detrimentally affected the structural integrity of the AC water mains. Key words: asbestos cement pipes, water mains, pipe failure, clay soil, climate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations94
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207