MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066219790 · doi:10.1115/ipc2006-10477

Laboratory Simulation of Hydrostatic Test in Near-Neutral pH Soil Environments

2006· article· en· W2066219790 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 2: Integrity Management; Poster Session; Student Paper Competition · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrostatic equilibriumHydrostatic stressHydrostatic testPipeline transportMaterials scienceStress corrosion crackingGeotechnical engineeringHydrostatic pressureCorrosionForensic engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringMechanicsMechanical engineeringComposite materialPhysicsFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrostatic testing is the principle method for managing stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of natural gas transmission pipelines. The long-term benefit of such testing relates to the stress margin between testing and operation and the effect of overstress on the surviving population of sub critical defects. This research was initiated to understand the response of these subcritical cracks of varied dimensions to hydrostatic testing in typical soil electrolytes that are conducive to SCC. More than 10 laboratory hydrostatic simulations have been conducted in this investigation. The results obtained provide insight into such issues as whether there will be crack advances during the hydrostatic test and the effect of hydrostatic testing on the subsequent growth of surviving cracks during service.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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