MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060308677 · doi:10.1115/ipc2012-90654

Review of R&D in Support of Mechanical Damage Threat Management in Onshore Transmission Pipeline Operations

2012· article· en· W2060308677 on OpenAlexaff
Murès Zaréa, Mark Piazza, Geoff Vignal, Charley Jones, Jerry Rau, Rick Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Context (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Integrity managementComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Construction engineeringKnowledge managementEngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Onshore pipeline industry has deployed in the last decade comprehensive integrity management programs in a constrained environment. These programs address all types of threats and resulting defects, yet the most complex defects are those due to mechanical damage, as they can combine local pipe deformations (dents) with metal removal (gouges) or even cracks. These programs are first placed in the broader risk management perspective that justify the whole approach and provide a view of the context. Then, operational threat management programs for mechanical damage as implemented by operators are briefly described here, and serve as a basis to identify the main gaps in terms of technology and knowledge. Finally, both incremental and more game-changing innovations as produced by R&D performed by PRCI and consultants, are described in subsequent sections as possible options to fill the identified gaps. Examples of roadmaps are provided that explain the coverage in terms of existing and evolving knowledge and technology, as provided by these R&D programs, to fill these gaps. These various levels of representations are complementary tools to communicate about links between operations, R&D, and their contributions to public safety.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207