MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190788999 · doi:10.1061/9780784483619.032

Designing Concrete Pressure Pipe to Resist Corrosion

2021· article· en· W3190788999 on OpenAlexaff
Richard I. Mueller, Yan Lan

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2021 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsCBC (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionCathodic protectionResistForensic engineeringPressure controlEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgyMechanical engineeringComposite materialAnode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In most of North America, concrete pressure pipe will perform for many decades without cathodic protection or other supplemental corrosion control mechanisms. There are locations on the continent where supplemental corrosion protection is essential for a concrete pressure pipe project to reach its design life. This paper will review the installation conditions in which concrete pressure pipe does and does not need supplemental protection, as well as present issues and options regarding the corrosion protection alternatives that can be applied.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePipelines 2021Same topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207