MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000272076 · doi:10.1061/9780784481653.050

When Transit Expansions Requires You to Really Understand Your Water System

2018· article· en· W3000272076 on OpenAlexaffabout
Arthur E. Sinclair, Ali Ahmadi

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2018 · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedundancy (engineering)Transit (satellite)Transit systemPublic transportWork (physics)Water supplyTransport engineeringComputer scienceRapid transitEngineeringEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines water distribution system research, planning, modeling, testing, and operations required by the city of Toronto to help facilitate transit expansion. The city of Toronto is experiencing public transit expansion not seen in a generation. This expansion is happening in a dense urban environment with water infrastructure that developed and evolved for over a hundred years. As transit is designed and constructed, water infrastructure often needs to be relocated or isolated while work occurs around it. These relocations and isolations mean shutting down watermains. No matter how big or small, shutting down a watermain has an impact on the system. Sometimes the magnitude of impact can be hard to predict. Most watermain networks have built-in redundancy. During ongoing transit construction, the sheer number of shutdowns required can stretch the limits of that redundancy. In some cases, critical pipes pose a significant challenge just to turn them off, let alone for much duration. In the case of large diameter transmission watermains, isolating them can take months of planning, and in some cases, new supplies need to be constructed before the pipe can be deactivated. To ensure uninterrupted supply to residents and businesses, an intimate understanding of the system is needed. To assist the transit authority requires a close working relationship and early planning.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

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)0.0000.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePipelines 2018Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207