MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Condition Prediction for Cured-in-Place Pipe Rehabilitation of Sewer Mains

2016· article· en· W2271579450 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMains electricityRehabilitationSanitary sewerEngineeringPredictive modellingCivil engineeringPipeline transportDriver rehabilitationForensic engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Authorities in Quebec, Canada, have been making considerable efforts to improve sewer networks across the province by using up-to-date technologies. To rehabilitate its sewer mains, Quebec has used several rehabilitation methods including slip lining, cement and epoxy lining, and cured-in-place pipe (CIPP).These replacement and rehabilitation techniques have been developed over the last four decades, with many arbitrary declarations made about the efficiency and performance of different rehabilitation techniques. This paper presents condition prediction models for CIPP rehabilitation of sewer mains. Regression analysis technique is used to develop these models, based on gathered and analyzed closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection reports for Quebec CIPP rehabilitations. The models can predict the structural and operational conditions of CIPP rehabilitation on the basis of basic input such as pipe material, and rehabilitation type and date. They can also generate curves illustrating condition deterioration over time with respect to governing factors. A data set was randomly selected and put aside for validating the developed models. Models validation was based on the value of the coefficient of multiple determination (R2) ranging between 94 and 99%. The developed models are expected to be used by municipalities and contractors to forecast the condition of rehabilitated pipelines, plan inspections, and make informed budget allocation decisions.

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 score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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