MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109668423 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2020-0334

State of watermain infrastructure: a Canadian case study using historic pipe break datasets

2020· article· en· W3109668423 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Brett Snider, Edward A. McBean

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForensic engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last two decades, a variety of reports have suggested that watermains in Canada are deteriorating, and break rates are increasing. However, these reports are often limited as the years of break records being utilized are brief; this paper revisits those assessments using over 45 years of break records and shows that three of the five utilities investigated are experiencing significant decreases in break rates over the past 10 years while the two other utilities are maintaining consistent break rates. These results indicate that these utilities are effectively managing their watermain infrastructure, and suggest watermain infrastructure throughout Canada may be performing better than suggested by cross-sectional survey results. Analyses indicate that on average, 22% of the watermains analyzed have exceeded the 0.125 breaks per km per year break rate threshold and may be considered for pipe replacement or rehabilitation. In particular, 50% of cast iron pipes installed post-WWII have exceeded a break rate threshold of 0.125 brks/km/year, suggesting large pipe replacement or rehabilitation of this pipe cohort is required.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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