MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194365380 · doi:10.5006/c2021-16245

Challenges in Implementing SP21424-2018 AC Corrosion Criteria.

2021· article· en· W3194365380 on OpenAlexaff
S.M. Segall, Hycem Bahgat, Ernesto Gudino, C. Khattar, S. Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Diagnostics and Reliability
Canadian institutionsAlberta Energy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionMaterials scienceMetallurgyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The new NACE Standard SP21424-20181 provides a set of simple criteria for assessing the risk of AC corrosion on existing collocations between powerlines and cathodically protected pipelines. However, the task of developing design criteria for new collocations is left to the pipeline operators. This paper covers a number of challenges related both to developing design criteria for new collocations and applying the new Standard to existing collocations. Topics like selection of the AC current density limit for mitigating AC corrosion on a new pipeline, recording AC and DC currents on 1 cm2 coupons and dealing with high AC and DC average current densities at low AC voltages are discussed in detail in this paper.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEngineering Diagnostics and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207