MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035236774 · doi:10.1080/15732479.2013.873471

A condition assessment model for oil and gas pipelines using integrated simulation and analytic network process

2014· article· en· W2035236774 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed S. El-Abbasy, Ahmed Senouci, Tarek Zayed, Fadi Mosleh

Bibliographic record

VenueStructure and Infrastructure Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersQatar National Research FundQatar Petroleum
KeywordsPipeline transportSubmarine pipelinePipeline (software)EngineeringProcess (computing)Petroleum engineeringFossil fuelMonte Carlo methodReliability engineeringEnvironmental scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Forensic engineeringComputer scienceWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringMechanical engineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Even though they are safe and economical transportation means of gas and oil products around the world, pipelines can be subject to failure and degradation generating hazardous consequences and irreparable environmental damages. Therefore, gas and oil pipelines need to be effectively monitored and assessed for optimal and safe operation. Many models have been developed in the last decade to predict pipeline failures and conditions. However, most of these models used corrosion features as the sole factor to assess the condition of pipelines. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to develop a condition assessment model of oil and gas pipelines that considers several factors besides corrosion. The proposed model, which uses both analytic network process and Monte Carlo simulation, considers the uncertainty of the factors affecting pipeline condition and the interdependency relationships between them. The performance of the model was tested on an existing offshore gas pipeline in Qatar and was found to be satisfactory. The model will help pipeline operators to assess the condition of oil and gas pipelines and hence prioritise their inspections and rehabilitation requirements.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructure and Infrastructure EngineeringSame topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207