Risk-Based and Condition-Based Assessment Framework for Large Diameter Sewers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Implementation of advanced and fit-for-purpose asset management strategies requires careful and thoughtful assessment of the physical conditions of buried, large diameter pipelines used within wastewater collection and conveyance systems. Knowledge of the structural integrity and hydraulic performance of these critical assets is therefore crucial. It provides guidance to municipalities and utilities on (1) prioritizing repair and replacement projects; (2) avoiding costly and disruptive emergency repairs; and (3) minimizing public and environmental impacts. The current work reports the development of a systematic methodology for conducting a condition assessment, for rehabilitation/replacement design, of large diameter sanitary and stormwater sewers. The methodology employs a risk-based asset management strategy coupled with risk management and condition assessment practices for prioritization of infrastructure assets based on criticality and direct and indirect impact of their potential failure on ‘Triple Bottom Line’. The proposed framework is based on sound engineering concepts and field experience. It is practical and simple to follow, and it has been successfully demonstrated to establish asset management and renewal/rehabilitation prioritization plans for different sewer rehabilitation projects across North America. The case study provided in this work demonstrated that integrating risk-based assessment approach into the conventional condition-based approach will not only capture the current structural integrity and hydraulic performance of these critical assets, but will, most importantly, account for the direct and indirect impact of their potential failure on ‘Triple Bottom Line’. This will help municipalities stretch their limited rehabilitation budgets and narrow the ‘infrastructure gap’ by enabling a ‘just-in-time’ investment strategy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".