MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271370967 · doi:10.1115/1.4032488

Probabilistic Performance Assessment of Fiber Optic Leak Detection Systems

2016· article· en· W2271370967 on OpenAlexaff
Alireda Aljaroudi, Faisal Khan, Ayhan Akintürk, M.R. Haddara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperabilityProbabilistic logicLeak detectionReliability engineeringLeakComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Pipeline transportDetection theoryRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceDetectorTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leak detection systems (LDSs) play a major role in enhancing reliability and operability of oil and gas pipelines. They have the functional capabilities to detect, locate, and quantify leaks before they can cause devastating effects to the environment and operation. The performance of LDSs is typically influenced by three different types of failures that may have severe consequences: delayed detection, missed detection, and false detection of a leak. The consequences of these failures lead to extensive financial losses. For example, missed detection leads to oil spills and exposes operating companies to financial risk and destroyed image while false detection results in unnecessary deployment of personnel and equipment. To maintain safety of personnel and the environment and ensure operation continuity, LDSs should be assessed regularly. To fulfill this need, a probabilistic performance assessment scheme based on limit state approach for fiber optic LDS has been developed. The inherent uncertainties associated with leak detection and reporting capabilities are modeled to determine the LDS detection failure probability that combines two failure events: missed detection and delayed detection. Moreover, the probability of false detection is derived in terms of the lowest detectable change, the threshold. These three parameters establish the basis for an overall assessment scheme that can be used to predict the performance of the LDS. The proposed assessment scheme has been applied to a case study to demonstrate its usefulness and feasibility.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207