MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563587138

ESTIMATING EXTERNAL CORROSION RATES FOR BURIED CARBON STEEL PIPING IN DIFFERENT SOIL CONDITIONS

2016· article· en· W2563587138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
MikkoJyrkama, MaheshPandey, PeterAngell, DougMunson

Bibliographic record

VenueCNL Nuclear Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipingCorrosionCarbon steelEnvironmental scienceCathodic protectionEngineeringMetallurgyEnvironmental engineeringMaterials science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

External or soil-side corrosion poses a significant threat to buried piping in many industrial facilities, including nuclear power plants. Unlike aboveground piping, the assessment of external corrosion of buried piping is challenged not only by access restrictions, but also by the complex and highly variable external environment. The analysis is further confounded by the use of protective measures, such as coatings and cathodic protection, which, while mitigating against the onset of degradation, themselves also degrade and break down over time.This study uses extensive field data collected by the National Bureau of Standards at numerous test sites across the United States to estimate the distribution of external corrosion rates for buried carbon steel piping under different soil conditions. The analysis is based on the concept of a “steady-state” corrosion rate, which is estimated for each test site in a 2-step process using logarithmic regression. The resulting uniform (i.e., general corrosion) and loc...

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNL Nuclear ReviewSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207