MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327220372 · doi:10.1115/ipc2012-90629

Developing a Predictive Model of Near Neutral pH Stress Corrosion Cracking of Underground Pipelines

2012· article· en· W2327220372 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Conrad, Weixing Chen, Reg Eadie, Richard Kania, Greg Van Boven, Robert Worthingham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsSpectra Energy (Canada)TransCanada (Canada)University of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogen embrittlementCorrosionCrackingStress corrosion crackingPipeline transportField (mathematics)Environmental scienceHydrogenStress (linguistics)Computer scienceReliability engineeringStructural engineeringForensic engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringMetallurgyComposite materialEnvironmental engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near neutral pH Stress Corrosion Cracking (NNpHSCC) associated with external corrosion of pipelines is an issue facing industry today. Determining areas of NNpHSCC susceptibility is crucial to developing Integrity Management Programs and inspection dig schedules. This research involved collecting pertinent field data (inspection dig reports, failure reports, loading histories) and developing a predictive model to help identify areas and lines most susceptible to NNpHSCC. The predictive model focused on the loading history (in this case, SCADA data) patterns to classify different groups of loading conditions. Hydrogen has been identified and established in previous literature to be a major contributor to NNpHSCC. Different Hydrogen Enhancement Factors (HEF) were applied based on how the mechanisms of hydrogen embrittlement react to the respective loading conditions. The predictive model illustrated a dormancy behaviour, similar to the one seen in field conditions and a mechanically activated growth dependent on both hydrogen and previous loading scenarios. A correlation was shown between a limited field sampling and the predicted values. Further improvements and calibrations can be made with the gathering of more field data and continued experimental validation. Once this validation has been performed, this model has the possibility to illustrate what loading conditions increase a segments susceptibility to NNpHSCC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.296
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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCorrosion Behavior and InhibitionFrench-language works237,207