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 OpenAlexaff
Weixing Chen, R. Sutherby

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.237
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

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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 2: Integrity Management; Poster Session; Student Paper CompetitionSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207