MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015127695 · doi:10.1115/ipc2004-0100

Inline Inspection Decisions and Results Using an Integrated Technology for a Baseline Inspection Program on a Large Diameter High Pressure Gas Transmission and Interconnect System

2004· article· en· W2015127695 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venue2004 International Pipeline Conference, Volumes 1, 2, and 3 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsPetroleum Technology Alliance CanadaCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)VendorPipeline transportEngineeringTransmission (telecommunications)InterconnectionReliability engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alliance Pipeline System consists of 2664 Km of NPS 36 high pressure transmission pipeline and 339 Km of NPS 42 high pressure transmission pipeline. The mainline systems are connected by lateral and interconnect pipeline sections ranging in diameter from NPS 4 to NPS 24. The pipeline system extends from northeast British Columbia to Illinois. The Trans border nature of the pipeline means that it needs to satisfy both the Canadian and US regulatory requirements related to pipeline integrity management. Part of the approval process for the pipeline system was that it had to be inspected on a regular basis with a baseline inspection program to be initiated upon start-up of the pipeline system in 2000. This paper outlines some of the unique challenges the high pressure transmission pipeline presented to both the operator and the inline inspection (ILI) vendor in developing a successful in line inspection program. It discusses the vendor selection criteria used by the pipeline operator and the design process undertaken by the ILI Vendor to meet the requirements of this unique pipeline system. By the end of 2004, the mainline sections in Canada and the US will have been inspected as well as most of the smaller diameter interconnect and lateral system. Results are presented from the ILI inspection of both the high pressure system and the smaller diameter system. While the inspections have used Magnetic Flux leakage (MFL) Technology to detect metal loss features, the use of integrated technology in particular the inertial navigation system aboard the vendor’s inspections tools has allowed geometric features to be detected as well. Lessons learned from both the operator and the ILI Vendor will be presented on the execution of the inline inspection program as well as discussion on ways of ensuring that the ILI process goes smoothly and if not how to address these concerns.

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)0.000
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 score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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