MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009501768 · doi:10.5006/c2019-13187

Interpretation of Electrical Codes for Cathodic Protection Installations

2019· article· en· W3009501768 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matthew Viveiros, Stephen B. Gibson, N. Melendez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCameco (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCathodic protectionInterpretation (philosophy)Materials scienceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringElectrodeElectrochemistryPhysicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cathodic protection (CP) systems are often a vital component of integrity management programs for oil sands facilities. The electrical components of these systems must be designed and installed in accordance with regional electrical codes, such as the Canadian Electrical Code (CEC) or the National Electrical Code (NEC). The CEC and NEC include limited direction on the electrical requirements for CP systems. This paper examines installations of typical CP components and suggests ways in which the CEC and NEC can be interpreted. It is demonstrated that interpretation of electrical requirements for CP systems can be difficult. To help improve compliance and understanding, future revisions of these codes should provide additional guidance for the design and installation of CP systems.

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)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207