MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030308317 · doi:10.1115/ipc2002-27348

Influence of Gradually Moving Slopes on Pipelines

2002· article· en· W2030308317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Peter Barlow

Bibliographic record

Venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslidePipeline transportTerrainGeologyPipeline (software)Mining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The river valleys in the plains of Western Canada and the Northwestern United States are relatively young in a geological time scale and often have extensive landslide activity on the valley slopes. Depending on the geology, these landslides can have very low movement rates and show little or no visible signs of slope movement, but still be relevant for the integrity of pipelines. Pipelines installed in gradually moving landslide terrain are subject to some risk of damage, depending on the details of the installation and the level of activity of the slide. Directionally drilled pipeline installations can be particularly vulnerable to this type of slope movement relative to long term integrity. A number of case histories are reviewed that involved pipeline installations on slopes that were moving at slow but persistent rates. Measures were successfully implemented at several of the slopes to lower the risk to the pipelines. Many of these cases involved relatively low cost drainage measures that significantly reduced the risk of pipeline damage.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and BSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207