MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465740872 · doi:10.1061/9780784479957.047

Numbers Still Don’t Lie—PCCP Performance Based on a Statistical Review of Fifteen Years of Inspection and Monitoring Data

2016· review· en· W2465740872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jorge Rodríguez‐Ruiz, Brian Gresehover, Tym Armstrong, Joshua Hill, Allison Stroebele

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2016 · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMains electricityPipeline (software)Range (aeronautics)Computer sciencePrestressed concreteEngineeringDatabaseForensic engineeringCivil engineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last thirty years, PCCP water and wastewater mains have been subject to a wide range of condition assessment techniques. In the past fifteen years, electromagnetic internal inspections and acoustic monitoring have become standard practice for critical large diameter PCCP water and wastewater mains. Electromagnetic inspections provide a baseline count of broken prestressing wire wraps for each pipe section, while acoustic monitoring identifies and locates wire breaks on an on-going basis. Together they allow clients to manage their PCCP in near-real time, enabling PCCP owners to understand the condition of their pipeline on a day-to-day basis and intervene when appropriate based on the specific number of wire breaks on a single pipe section and its corresponding structural state. In 2012, a study on the electromagnetic inspections and acoustic monitoring databases, provided by Pure Technologies, investigated the incidence of distressed PCCP and the rate of wire breaks recorded on individual pipe sections. Over the past three years, a more extensive database has been developed within Pure Technologies allowing for more comprehensive study, including investigation of the specific characteristics of deteriorated, active, and repaired pipes. This paper will review the data from approximately 3,000 miles of electromagnetic inspection and over 700 miles of PCCP currently being acoustically monitored with fiber optic cable. The paper will analyze a database of 44,000 individual wire breaks in over 185,000 prestressed concrete cylinder pipes. Although the database includes systems from all over the world, this paper will focus on data from inspections and acoustic monitoring systems located in the U.S. and Canada. The goal of the paper is to review and update the results of electromagnetic inspections and the acoustic monitoring database to analyze the performance of PCCP water transmission mains and sewer force mains. The study will evaluate the occurrence and rate of wire breaks within PCCP of various specifications and within different pipelines and loadings. The findings will be presented on a statistical basis, with associated confidence or likelihood for each conclusion. The data will also be evaluated for the suitability of working within a predictive model. The predictive model will estimate the possibility of pipe failures over future time horizons. The predictive model supports decisions related to the development of cost effective, long-term management strategies and planning capital replacement needs. The findings will help clients better manage their pipelines and further the industry’s knowledge.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.022
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePipelines 2016Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207