MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965968551 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v11n4p69

Pipes Construction Based on the Pipes' Centre Curve Shapes

2019· article· en· W2965968551 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kusno Kusno

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTangentCurvaturePerpendicularSection (typography)Laminar flowTube (container)MathematicsPipeline (software)GeometryMechanicsComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parts of pipeline need a long piece, a short segment, and various inflate-deflate models. They require as well the thickness and curvature of the pipes. The objective of this paper is to obtain some formulas for modeling the long pipe, the short tube, and various inflate-deflate pipe patches. Relating to the purposes, we use their cross-section, longitudinal section, and center curves of the pipe parts. The methods are, the using of the polar coordinates and of the real functions, to define the cross and longitudinal section of the pipe patches, respectively. Then, we calculate three orthonormal vectors that are determined by the tangent vectors of the pipe center curves and two unit vectors that are perpendicular to the tangent vectors. After that, we evaluate the formulas to model the long pipes and the short pipes, both inflate-deflate and thickness shapes. The results show that, using its center curves of the pipe, it is handy to design the long and short pipes, multiple thicknesses, various volume fluctuations of the pipes, and useful to model the inflate-deflate pipe parts.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207