MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743192450 · doi:10.1061/9780784480892.034

Performance Modeling of Wastewater Collection Networks Using Multi-Proactive Renewal Analysis

2017· article· en· W2743192450 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2017 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsResearch CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanitary sewerWastewaterAsset managementWork (physics)Computer scienceAsset (computer security)Data collectionPlan (archaeology)Environmental economicsBusinessEnvironmental scienceEngineeringComputer securityFinanceEnvironmental engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, highly deteriorated wastewater pipes are given priority in capital work activities. To this end, when capital budgets are limited, money is first allocated to replacing sewers in WRC Internal Condition Grade 5 (ICG 5), the worst condition based on WRc coding system, and the remaining budget is then used for the next condition groups such as ICG 4. This study investigates the effect of partial allocation of capital budgets between fully-deteriorated (ICG 5) and semi-deteriorated (ICG 4) sewers, using a system dynamic modeling approach over the design life of the asset. The results of analyzing a Canadian wastewater collection network show that a multi-proactive rehabilitation strategy can be more effective in the long-term financial planning of wastewater collection networks. Municipalities and utilities can use the decision-support tool provided herein as an effective asset management plan for wastewater collection networks.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.206 · 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