MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109150949 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2020-0287

Managing sewerage networks using both failure modes, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methods

2020· article· en· W3109150949 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mohamed Benbachir, Marzouk Cherrared, Djaouida Chenaf

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFailure mode, effects, and criticality analysisSewerageAnalytic hierarchy processReliability engineeringFailure mode and effects analysisProcess (computing)Consistency (knowledge bases)CriticalityEngineeringComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Operations researchEnvironmental engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a methodology for managing complex sewerage networks based on the concomitant use of two performance evaluation methods, namely, the failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) and the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The FMECA is used to determine the risks of structural failures making it possible to establish a methodology for managing these failures. The AHP is used to check the relationship consistency between the performance indicators allowing the determination of the overall performance (OP). This proposed methodology was utilized for the urban sewerage network of Oued-Kniss in the city of Algiers, Algeria, as part of the efforts engaged in for sustainable and efficient management.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207