MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883373216 · doi:10.1002/awwa.1089

Examining the Energy Performance Associated With Typical Pipe Unit Head Loss Thresholds

2018· article· en· W2883373216 on OpenAlexafffund
Saeed Hashemi, Yves Filion, Vanessa Speight

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityJacobs (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHydraulic headHead (geology)Mains electricityEnergy (signal processing)Friction lossPipe network analysisEnvironmental scienceFlow (mathematics)Marine engineeringEngineeringMechanicsMechanical engineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeologyMathematicsStatisticsElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The energy performance of water mains is rarely used as a criterion for pipe rehabilitation decisions, yet there is a need to identify the worst‐performing pipes to target investment wisely. This study links pipe characteristics with energy performance to understand how traditional pipe replacement thresholds perform in terms of energy. A cross‐correlation analysis between pipe characteristics and pipe energy performance metrics, using a benchmarking data set of more than 20,000 water mains from 17 distribution systems, showed that unit head loss is closely related to net energy efficiency and the energy lost to friction (ELTF) in pipes, along with flow. Under average flow conditions, 3.2% of the pipes exceeded 3 m/km (ft/1,000 ft) of unit head loss, with 1.1% exceeding the more stringent 10 m/km threshold. Over 90% of pipes have a unit head loss below 1 m/km, which corresponds to an ELTF of 1.9%.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207