MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automated Detection and Location of Leaks in Water Mains Using Infrared Photography

2009· article· en· W2124164983 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mohamed Fahmy, Osama Moselhi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMains electricityThermographyEnvironmental sciencePipeline transportLeak detectionLeakEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringInfrared

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leakage of water distribution networks is the most common reason of undesirable losses of potable water. Problems associated with water main leaks pose growing concern around the globe. These problems include water and energy loss, in addition to the risk it poses to structural damage of adjacent properties. In current practice, not all water leaks can be detected in a timely and cost effective manner. This paper presents a study conducted for detection of water leaks in underground pipelines, and identification of their respective locations using thermography infrared camera. The paper describes the field work and the experimental protocol which were carried out over 2 years in three different locations in greater Montréal (Canada) area in order to investigate factors that affect the applicability and limitations of using IR camera in water leak detection. These factors beyond those studied in previous work carried out by American Water Works Association and National Research Council. The paper presents a model developed to determine approximate location of leaks in water mains. The developed model was then applied successfully to detect and locate leaks in water mains in fall and spring seasons. It failed, however, to detect leaks in the summer and winter due to high pavement temperature and the snow coverage, respectively.

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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations62
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Performance of Constructed FacilitiesSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207