MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743556419 · doi:10.1061/9780784480885.009

Lessons Learned Mapping Critical Pressure Pipelines: City of Ottawa Case Studies

2017· article· en· W2743556419 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
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsIntertek (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsset managementPipeline (software)Pipeline transportIntegrity managementAsset (computer security)Computer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemGeographic information systemMains electricityVulnerability (computing)Construction engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringComputer securityRemote sensingGeologyBusinessTelecommunicationsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The City of Ottawa is a municipality of 960,000 people that owns and operates its own watermain and sewer infrastructure. The City has developed industry-leading comprehensive asset management strategies for its pipe infrastructure. A key element of the management strategy for its critical pressure pipes-the large-diameter watermains (24 in. to 78 in.) and sewer force mains (all sizes up to 42 in.)-includes mapping. Pipeline mapping is a useful tool for addressing distress and managing the asset. However, when trying to correlate internal pipe conditions to above ground coordinates, a number of challenges arise, particularly when defects are identified as a part of the condition assessment. In order to effectively intervene on a distressed pipe, it is critical to be able to locate and excavate that pipe with certainty. Errors in mapping can lead to erroneous excavations, costing the City valuable time and money. In order to overcome this challenge, a variety of technologies and methodologies have been utilized to map the City’s pipelines. To date the City has completed over 24.2 mi of 2-dimensional mapping using a combination of above ground GPS points and internal pipe data collected as part of the condition assessment work. Different inline inspection tools were used to collect the data required to create the maps, including tethered and free swimming tools, depending on the inspection requirements. This paper will discuss the methods used to create the GIS data of the over 24.2 mi of pipeline; the benefits to having the mapping data; lessons learned while trying to use the map; comparisons between the inspection GIS and the City’s GIS; as well as overall challenges with mapping pipelines in general.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.263 · 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