Validation of water main failure predictions: A <scp>2‐year</scp> case study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent studies have shown that U.S. water mains are failing at an accelerating rate. In the meantime, water utilities are challenged by limited funding. It is important that water mains with much higher likelihood of failure (LOF) are replaced before they fail to avoid possible high consequences, such as public safety threats, high financial losses, and environmental damages. This article presents a model to evaluate the LOF of water mains using data available in geographic information systems (GIS). A case study is presented comparing 2 years of actual water main break data with the results of the model. The comparison shows a strong correlation between the model prediction and the actual break rates of main pipes; thus, it validates the robustness of the model and shows that funding can be used more efficiently by focusing on the water mains with a high LOF as predicted by the GIS model. This model has been used in New Jersey American Water's distribution systems. It can be used in other water systems to help guide water main replacement efforts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it