MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288441613 · doi:10.1061/9780784484289.025

Failure Analysis of Asbestos Cement Pipe Using Recent Main Break Data

2022· article· en· W4288441613 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 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsAmerican Water (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsbestos cementCementAsbestosForensic engineeringEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringGeologyMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asbestos cement (AC) pipe was used as pipe material starting from 1930s. It was widely used during 1950s–1960s, and it phased out in the US in 1980s due to health concerns and the availability of PVC pipe. It was estimated that 600,000 mi AC pipe were installed in the United States and Canada. Several studies show that AC pipes are experiencing accelerated failure in recent years. To prioritize the AC main replacements, it is important to understand the performance of AC pipe in the water system. This paper analyzes the failures of AC pipe using the most recent 12-year main break data. AC pipes in coastal area and inland area were analyzed separately to understand their break rates. The results of this analysis could help utilities better understand the performance of AC pipe and prioritize AC pipe replacement.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · 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