MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948238214 · doi:10.1080/1478422x.2019.1615741

Dynamic risk management of assets susceptible to pitting corrosion

2019· article· en· W2948238214 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCorrosion Engineering Science and Technology The International Journal of Corrosion Processes and Corrosion Control · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPitting corrosionRisk managementCorrosionControl limitsLimit (mathematics)Bayesian probabilityProcess (computing)Reliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceForensic engineeringEconometricsEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringControl chartMetallurgyBusinessEconomicsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a methodology to assess and dynamically update the risk of process components affected by pitting corrosion. The proposed framework considers the time-dependent growth of pits and uses the non-homogenous Markov process to model the maximum pit depth. The developed pit depth model is incorporated into a limit state function to estimate the failure probability of affected components. Economic consequences are estimated considering both business and accidental losses due to failure. The estimated risk is updated using Bayesian analysis as new inspection data become available. Different risk management strategies including prevention, control and mitigation measures are also studied.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.212 · 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