MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900571192 · doi:10.5006/c2018-11245

Abrasive Blasting Surface Preparation – Does the Pipeline Coating Industry Really Understand It?

2018· article· en· W2900571192 on OpenAlexaff
Shiwei Guan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetal Alloys Wear and Properties
Canadian institutionsCanadian General-Tower (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRock blastingCoatingAbrasivePipeline (software)Materials scienceMetallurgyPipeline transportComposite materialEngineeringMechanical engineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The author uses three recent international pipeline projects as examples, to illustrate that the typical surface profile height and abrasive blast cleaning requirements in today’s coating standards and specifications have not been sufficient to define the adequate level of the abrasive blasting in order to provide wetting and adhesion of the pipe coatings to the pipe substrate, partially causing the pipeline coating disbondment. Adhesion mechanisms, limitations of the current standards of defining surface profile, and recommendations for future pipeline coating projects are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetal Alloys Wear and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207