MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038035203 · doi:10.1109/icgpr.2012.6254979

Pipe condition assessments using Pipe Penetrating Radar

2012· article· en· W2038035203 on OpenAlexaff
Csaba Ékes, B. Neducza

Bibliographic record

Venue2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarRadarWater pipeGeologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of Pipe Penetrating Radar (PPR), the underground in-pipe application of GPR, a non-destructive testing method that can detect defects and cavities within and outside mainline diameter (>;18 in/450mm) non-metallic (concrete, PVC, HDPE, etc.) underground pipes. The method uses two or more high frequency GPR antennae carried by a robot into underground pipes. The radar data are transmitted to the surface via fibre optic cable and are recorded together with the output from CCTV (and optionally sonar and laser). Proprietary software analyzes the data and pinpoints defects or cavities within and outside the pipe. Thus the testing can identify existing pipe and pipe bedding symptoms that can be addressed to prevent catastrophic failure due to sinkhole development and can provide useful information about the remaining service life of the pipe, enabling accurate predictability of needed intervention or the timing of replacement. This reliable non-destructive testing method significantly impacts subsurface infrastructure condition based asset management by supplying previously unattainable measurable conditions.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2012 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)Same topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207