MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067921638 · doi:10.4043/25522-ms

Ice Based Construction of Offshore Arctic Pipelines

2015· article· en· W2067921638 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

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsIntecsea (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubseaSubmarine pipelinePipeline transportArcticPipeline (software)Marine engineeringSubarctic climateEnvironmental scienceSea iceTrenchEngineeringOceanographyGeologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the nearshore zone of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea, three subsea pipeline bundles have been successfully installed by using conventional onshore construction equipment in the winter season operating from a thickened sea ice platform. Differences in water depth, route length and corresponding pipeline design for BP Northstar, Pioneer Oooguruk and Eni Nikaitchuq impacted the winter construction procedures used for each project. Each of these projects used the winter construction season to its maximum advantage, allowing the use of conventional and adapted onshore construction equipment and techniques. Comparatively, ice based winter pipeline construction in subarctic conditions has been generally less successful. On-ice pipeline fabrication and installation into a subsea trench has a track record for shallow water pipeline installation with reduced permitting issues compared to summer installation. Based on the experiences of these projects, this paper reviews the limitations of on-ice construction, the typical construction activities; the main equipment used and will highlight the main lessons learned.

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 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 score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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