MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619865166 · doi:10.5006/c2012-01167

Field Methods for Estimating Pipeline Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Rate at Near-Neutral pH

2012· article· en· W2619865166 on OpenAlexaff
Fengmei Song, Baotong Lu, Ming Gao, M. Elboujdaîni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals
Canadian institutionsGovernment of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionStress (linguistics)Stress corrosion crackingPipeline (software)Materials scienceMetallurgyForensic engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Crack growth rate (CGR) is a key parameter used in pipeline integrity management for estimating inspection or reassessment intervals due to stress corrosion cracking (SCC). The current industrial practice of estimating CGRs is based on empirical approaches, assuming a constant rate or a rate obtained through linear extrapolation. A semi-empirical model was recently reported that enabled the prediction of CGRs for pipeline near-neutral pH SCC. In this work, a four-step procedure was developed and proposed to apply this model for field use. The method developed in this work may serve as an alternative to the methods currently being used in the pipeline industry. A proper CGR should be chosen by evaluating all the CGRs obtained from the different methods and by using expert’s best judgment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metalsFrench-language works237,207