MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089393538 · doi:10.1115/ipc2002-27394

Effective Use of an Alliance to Deliver Pipeline Maintenance Services

2002· article· en· W2089393538 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne G. McFarlane, Allen Marsollier

Bibliographic record

Venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDiverse Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Process (computing)Service (business)PaymentProcess managementComputer scienceBusinessWork (physics)Task (project management)Pipeline transportEngineering managementOperations managementRisk analysis (engineering)MarketingSystems engineeringEngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipeline companies face a difficult task in cost-effectively managing pipeline maintenance activities. Complexity is introduced due to geographical expanse, remote locations, access to qualified contractors and the desire to hire locally, and contract management of available suppliers. Pipeline companies have traditionally provided maintenance activities through in-house resourcing, or management of a multitude of available contractors. With increasing efforts to focus in-house resources on core pipeline operations, there has been a corresponding shift in moving noncore maintenance activities to outside providers. This has introduced an increase in administration costs associated with supplier qualification activities, document management and payment processing. TransCanada PipeLines Limited has developed a model where core skills have been retained to perform critical activities in-house and less essential services have been contracted out, along with the management of the subcontracts. This model relies on a central dispatch service along with a large base of subcontractors strategically located along our pipeline system to provide these services. The process involves two basic steps — managing subcontractors and performing work. Managing subcontractors is the key to the process. This part of the process proactively provides TransCanada with qualified subcontractors at the right place, the right time and for the best price. This paper will discuss the alliance model we’ve implemented in conjunction with Ledcor Industrial Maintenance Ltd. for contracted services and how this arrangement is crucial to our success in managing maintenance activities cost effectively. We will describe the model, how it was developed and implemented, how it works and some of the benefits that make it a successful contribution to regional operations. We will also discuss some of the key lessons learned. Further details on the process will be presented, along with the bottom-line benefits associated with this type of relationship.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue4th International Pipeline Conference, Parts A and BSame topicDiverse Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207