Corrosion Growth Modeling by Learning a Dynamic Bayesian Network From Multiple In-Line Inspection Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper establishes a dynamic Bayesian network to model the growth of corrosion defects on energy pipelines. The integrated model characterizes the growth of defect depth by a homogeneous gamma process and considers the biases and random errors associated with the in-line inspection (ILI) tools. The distributions of the mean value and coefficient of variation of the annual growth of defect depth are learned from multiple ILI data using the parameter learning technique of Bayesian networks. With the same technique, the distributions of the biases and standard deviation of random errors associated with ILI tools are learned from ILI data and their corresponding field measurements. An example with real corrosion management data is used to illustrate the process of developing the model structure, learning model parameters and predicting the corrosion growth and time-dependent failure probability. The results indicate that the model can in general predict the growth of corrosion defects with reasonable accuracy and the ILI-reported and field-measured depth can be used to update the time-dependent failure probability in a near-real-time manner. In comparison with existing growth models, the graphical feature of Bayesian networks makes it more intuitive and transparent to users. The employment of parameter learning provides a semi-automated and convenient approach to elicit the probabilistic information from ILI and field measurement data. The above advantages will facilitate the application of the model in the practice of corrosion management in pipeline industry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".