MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pipeline crawler development for mapping gas pipeline topology

2021· article· en· W3185249967 on OpenAlexaff
Shuo Zhang, Stevan Dubljević

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)OdometerInertial measurement unitWeb crawlerGlobal Positioning SystemComputer scienceReal-time computingGeographic information systemPipeline transportTopology (electrical circuits)EngineeringRemote sensingGeographyArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate geographic location of a pipeline is important information for pipeline maintenance and leak detection. Usually, the geographic location of a pipeline on the ground can be measured directly by global positioning system (GPS) technology, but it is much difficult to determine the geographic location of an underground pipeline. In this paper, a new technique based on the developed pipeline crawler is proposed for mapping of underground small-diameter gas pipeline topology. The pipeline crawler is equipped with a micro electro mechanical system (MEMS) based inertial measurement unit (IMU) and odometers. The kinematic model and the measurement model of the pipeline crawler are established based on the IMU and odometers. Mapping of pipeline topology is completed by the sensor fusion algorithm which is proposed to reconstruct crawler path using sensor data and pipeline features. The experiment is given to illustrate the advantage of the new pipeline mapping technique.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207