MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122678377 · doi:10.1115/ipc2020-9609

Reliability-Based Assessment Method of Buried Pipeline at Fault Crossings

2020· article· en· W3122678377 on OpenAlexaff
Qian Zheng, Xiaoben Liu, Hong Zhang, Samer Adeeb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodStructural engineeringArtificial neural networkReliability (semiconductor)Fault (geology)Computer scienceLimit state designDisplacement (psychology)Failure assessmentPipeline (software)EngineeringGeologyMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The tectonic fault, which is one of the most common geohazards in field, poses great threat to buried pipe segments. Pipes will process to buckling or fracture due to large strain induced by continuously increasing ground displacements during earthquakes. Therefore, it is imperative to conduct safety analysis on pipes which are buried in seismic areas for the sake of ensuring normal operation. However, the highly nonlinearity of pipe response restricts the proceeding of reliability assessment. In this study, a hybrid procedure combining finite element method and artificial neural network is proposed for reliability-based assessment. First of all, the finite element model is developed on ABAQUS platform to simulate pipe response to strike-slip fault displacements. Thus, the strain demand value (the peak strain value obtained by finite element model in each design case) can be collected for database establishment, which is the preparation for neural network training. Thoroughness of the strain demand database can be achieved by a fully comprehensive calculation with consideration of influencing factors involving pipe diameter and wall thickness, operating pressure, magnitude of fault displacement, intersection angle between pipeline and fault plane, and characteristic value of backfill mechanics. Sequentially, Back Propagation Neural Network (BPNN) with double hidden layers is trained based on the developed database, and the surrogate strain demand prediction model can be obtained after accuracy verification. Hence, the strain-based limit state function can be respectively determined for tensile and compressive conditions. The strain capacity term is simply assumed based on published papers, the strain demand term is naturally superseded by the surrogate BPNN model, and Monte Carlo Simulation is employed to compute the probability of failure (POF). At last, the workability of the proposed approach is tested by a case study in which basic variables are referred to the Second West-to-East natural gas transmission pipeline project. It indicates that ANN is a good solver for reliability problems with implicit limit state functions especially for highly nonlinear problems. The proposed method is capable of computing POFs, which is an exploratory application for reliability research on pipes withstanding fault displacement loads.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207