MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212261904 · doi:10.1115/1.4052984

Transferable Pipeline Rupture Detection Using Multiple Artificial Intelligence Classifiers During Transient Operations

2021· article· en· W3212261904 on OpenAlexaff
Chris MacDonald, Michael Yang, Shawn Learn, Simon Park, Ron Hugo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pressure Vessel Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAlberta EnergyUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkComputer sciencePipeline (software)Classifier (UML)Artificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Operator (biology)Machine learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There are several challenges associated with existing pipeline rupture detection systems, including an inability to accurately detect during transient conditions (such as changes in pump operating points), an inability to easily transfer from one pipeline configuration to another, and relatively slow response times. To address these challenges, we employ multiple artificial intelligence (AI) classifiers that rely on pattern recognition instead of traditional operator-set thresholds. AI techniques, consisting of two-dimensional (2D) convolutional neural networks (CNN) and adaptive neuro fuzzy interface systems (ANFISs), are used to mimic processes performed by operators during a rupture event. This includes both visualization (using CNN) and rule-based decision making (using ANFIS). The system provides a level of reasoning to an operator through the use of rule-based AI. Pump station sensor data is nondimensionalized prior to AI processing, enabling pipeline configurations outside of the training dataset, independent of geometry, length, and medium. AI algorithms undergo testing and training using two data sets: laboratory-collected flow loop data that mimics transient pump-station operations and real operator data that include simulated ruptures using the real time transient model (RTTM). The multiple AI classifier results are fused together to provide higher reliability especially detecting ruptures from pipeline data not used in the training process.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pressure Vessel TechnologySame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207