MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743208638 · doi:10.1061/9780784480885.001

Sinkhole Locating and Corrosion Quantification with Pipe Penetrating Radar

2017· article· en· W2743208638 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Csaba Ékes

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2017 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarRebarWater pipeTrenchRadarSinkholeGeologyCorrosionStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceLayer (electronics)Mechanical engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pipe penetrating radar (PPR) is the underground in-pipe application of ground penetrating radar (GPR), a non-destructive testing method that can detect defects and cavities within non-ferrous (reinforced concrete, vitrified clay, PVC, HDPE, etc.) pipes. The key advantage of PPR is the unique ability to map pipe wall thickness and deterioration including voids outside the pipe, enabling accurate predictability of needed rehabilitation or the timing of replacement. This paper presents recent advancement of PPR inspection technology together with selected case studies. The century old Broadway sewer main in Everett, WA, is a combination of a 30” reinforced concrete (RC) pipe and a 36” brick pipe. Little information is known about the condition of these pipes and the owners needed structural information beyond the usual closed circuit television (CCTV) in order to plan long term management of these critical assets. Over 16,000 ft of high resolution PPR line data were collected via robotic inspection. Due to the highly complex nature of the geophysical data, data processing and interpretation was a critical component of this project. The PPR results revealed that there are variations in the rebar cover in segments of the RC pipe. Although the average minimum rebar cover (depth of the first layer of rebar measured from the inner surface of the pipe wall) in almost every pipe segment appears to be sufficient (more than 0.75"), local anomalies occur along the pipe. No voids were detected outside the concrete pipe. In the second case study PPR was used for the condition assessment of asbestos cement (AC) pipes. AC pipes form a significant component of the water distribution and sewer collection systems in many cities. A majority of these pipes appear to be approaching the end of their useful life. The ability to accurately and cost-effectively assess the wall thickness of asbestos cement pipe has become a critically important issue for pipe owners. A new, high resolution PPR system, the SewerVUE AC Pipe Scanner (ACPS) was developed and successfully deployed in a live 10” AC pipe in Surrey, BC, Canada. Using new, high frequency antennae, the PPR inspection accurately mapped the remaining wall thickness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePipelines 2017Same topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207