MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191712575 · doi:10.1061/9780784483602.002

ATCO’s Urban Pipeline Replacement (UPR) Program

2021· article· en· W3191712575 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePipelines 2021 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsATCO (Canada)Alberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Computer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2010, ATCO began its Urban Pipeline Replacement (UPR) program, a transformation of its high-pressure transmission and low-pressure distribution pipeline infrastructure in Calgary and Edmonton, the most populous urban centers in Alberta, Canada. The UPR program established an alternative for ATCO to address its vintage transmission assets in urban settings by utilizing the province’s Transportation Utility Corridors (TUC). ATCO’s redesign of the transmission and distribution systems included qualitative considerations to improve system reliability and integrity management capabilities, support future system growth, and minimize the risk to the public through the significant reduction in probability of a pipeline failure. Supply of natural gas for heating is an essential service in Alberta and system changes are evaluated with that fact held paramount. ATCO presents an insight to the rationale that led to the evaluation of vintage urban pipelines, the benefits of the UPR program in comparison to replacement in place and integrity review and repair alternatives, and logistical challenges related to execution of UPR needed to maintain service throughout the program.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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