MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238001375 · doi:10.1002/9781118436707.hmse033

Corrosion Monitoring

2013· other· en· W4238001375 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre R. Roberge

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionCorrosion monitoringProcess (computing)Computer scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceOperating systemMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Corrosion monitoring refers to corrosion measurements performed under industrial or practical operating conditions. This requirement has led to the evolution of corrosion monitoring tools toward real‐time data acquisition, process control tools, knowledge based systems, and smart structures. Correct and effective corrosion monitoring strategies should be used as a proactive tool to assist with operating a plant or any other system more effectively, thereby prolonging its life and gaining optimum throughput. Fundamentally, four strategies have been discussed to an organization in its dealings with corrosion. Corrosion monitoring systems vary significantly in complexity, from simple coupon exposures or handheld data loggers to fully integrated plant process surveillance units with remote data access and data management capabilities. Numerous real‐time corrosion monitoring programs in diverse branches of industry have revealed that the severity of corrosion damage is rarely uniform with time. Rather, serious corrosion damage is usually sustained in time frames where operational parameters have suffered upsets. These undesirable operational windows can only be identified with the real‐time monitoring approach. An example of a widely available technique is linear polarization resistance, which many commercial monitoring systems use to measure corrosion rates.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.039

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicConcrete Corrosion and DurabilityFrench-language works237,207