MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538407715 · doi:10.1115/ipc2000-186

Crack Detection Program on the Cromer to Gretna, Manitoba Section of Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 3

2000· article· en· W2538407715 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportPipeline (software)PiggingLine (geometry)Section (typography)ExcavationWeldingEngineeringGas pipelineGeologyForensic engineeringGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringComputer scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Line 3 is an 860mm (34 inch), API 5LX Grade X52 pipeline with nominal wall thickness ranging from 7.14 mm to 12.5 mm. The Canadian portion of the Line runs from Edmonton, Alberta to Gretna, Manitoba. It was constructed between 1963 and 1969 in a series of loops designed to increase the capacity of the Enbridge system. Until 1999 the pipeline operated in a looped configuration with neighboring 24 inch and 48 inch pipelines. Line 3 downstream of Kerrobert, Saskatchewan began operating in straight 34 inch configuration in 1999 following completion of the first phase expansion project known as Terrace Expansion Project that connects the (48 inch) loops with a new (36 inch) pipeline. In 1997, the Pipetronix (now PII) Ultrascan CD in-line inspection tool was run for 283 km from Cromer to Gretna, Manitoba, to identify long seam cracking and pipe body stress corrosion cracking. This section of the line is comprised primarily of pipe manufactured with a double submerged arc welded long seam with short sections of pipe having electric resistance welded long seams. There were two primary objectives set forth in this inspection project. The first was to assess the integrity of this section of Line 3 and identify anomalies, which might affect the future operation of the pipeline. The second objective was to evaluate the performance of the Ultrascan CD tool and determine its potential role in the Enbridge integrity program. A series of excavations have been conducted based upon the analysis of this data and none of the indications identified were considered to be an immediate concern to the integrity of the pipeline. Notably, two of the excavations resulted in the detection of the first two “significant” SCC colonies (based upon the CEPA definition of significant) [1] found on the Enbridge system. This paper will focus on the tool performance requirements established by Enbridge prior to the inspection run which include specific defect type and size and defects at a maximum sensitivity of the tool. In addition, the information obtained as a result of the excavation program and onsite inspection and assessments. The information gathered, from this program were useful in better understanding the tool tolerance in detecting such defects and to better differentiate between them.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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