MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754989654 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0084

Copula parameter estimation using Bayesian inference for pipe data analysis

2017· article· en· W2754989654 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farzana Atique, Nii Attoh-Okine

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)InferenceBayesian probabilityMains electricityData miningEngineeringComputer scienceStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water main systems are aging and becoming a growing concern for maintenance. The structural deterioration of water mains is affected by different factors, such as pipe age, pipe material, soil condition, and pipe size, among others. Various methods of modeling have been used to predict the failure of water mains. Since pipe networks are underground and obtaining data on pipe conditions is very costly, statistical modeling has been widely used for pipe condition assessment. An emerging statistical method known as copula modeling is used here for pipe data analysis. The copula method is very useful in cases where marginals belong to different families of distributions. It is also useful for generating a large number of data points when it is difficult to obtain a data set, as is the case for pipe condition assessment, and where data sets have random variables belonging to non-Gaussian family distributions. Different copula families are applied here to model the dependency between the pipe age and repair age of pipes. The paper uses a Bayesian framework to estimate the parameter values in the copula model. This approach offers an additional option for estimating copula parameters for pipe data.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207