MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464048301 · doi:10.1061/9780784479957.023

12” Ductile Iron Forcemain Inspection in the Dead of Winter: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

2016· article· en· W2464048301 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsPQ Corporation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Asset managementEngineeringForensic engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMechanical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In November 2014, PICA Corporation was selected to perform an inline inspection of a 12” 10,033 ft ductile iron forcemain for Gull Lake Sewer and Water Authority (GLSWA) located just east of Kalamazoo, MI. The inspection was conducted under the State of Michigan’s Stormwater, Asset Management and Wastewater (SAW) program. The pipeline was originally installed in 1982 and traverses a rural part of town. GLSWA had experienced some failures in the past and wanted to get the actual remaining wall-thickness of the pipeline by utilizing PICA’s remote field testing inspection tool, the SeeSnake. With an early onset of winter and frigid conditions many hurdles and obstacles had to be resolved to perform the inspection. This paper will detail how both GLSWA and PICA overcame them and will include verified defect accuracy (axially and clock position) inspection results.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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