MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2548103333 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2016-0538

Editorial: Recent developments in pipeline geotechnics

2016· editorial· en· W2548103333 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
George Kouretzis, Susan Gourvenec

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeotechnicsGeotechnical engineeringPipeline (software)GeologyEngineeringForensic engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipelines transport a variety of gasses and fluids across continents and oceans and traverse extremes of terrain and environments.This special issue presents invited papers addressing a variety of pipeline geotechnics challenges both onshore and offshore, in a range of geotechnical conditions including arctic environments.The authors of the selected papers, all recognised experts in the field of pipeline geotechnics, are academicians and practitioners from Canada, USA, Europe, India, China and Australia.Canadian Geotechnical Journal has traditionally served as a forum for presenting developments in geotechnical aspects of pipeline engineering.Over 100 articles on soil resistance developing during relative soil-pipeline movements, pipelines in permafrost, interaction of partially-embedded offshore pipelines with the seabed during heating-cooling episodes amongst other subjects have been published in Canadian Geotechnical Journal since 1972, with almost half of these published during the last 10 years -signifying an increasing interest in the subject.With Canadian Geotechnical Journal being a key journal for the publication of research findings and practical applications of pipeline geotechnics, it seemed natural to invite some of the leading groups from Canada and internationally to showcase their latest work in a special issue.The collection of articles covers active research areas and state-of-the-art practices in the design and analysis of new pipelines, and the evaluation of the performance of existing pipelines.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.015

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures→French-language works237,207→