Prediction of pipe performance with stacking ensemble learning based approaches
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
American Water Works Association has estimated that, by 2050, the total cost of pipeline system management will exceed $1.7 trillion. Thus, it is important to assess the performance of water mains in order to optimize the rehabilitation process. Recently, the use of machine learning methods in pipeline condition prediction has increased. However, existing pipe performance prediction models rely solely on underlying data-generating distributions and do not accommodate different datasets. Hence, a stacking ensemble based method is proposed in this work to overcome the drawbacks of the existing models and improve the predictive power of this mode of analysis. Using soil property data, both a single-model and an ensemble-model were constructed to forecast the pipe condition, and their prediction performance was compared and contrasted. Finally, the superiority of the proposed ensemble method was verified through its lowest value in the root-mean-square error relative to the individual models. The techniques presented in this work can aid in a reliable decision making in infrastructure management of buried pipeline 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it