Optimized Cathode Protection Model for Best Anode Parameter Selection Using Machine Learning Approach: Iraq—Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cathodic protection is a significant approach utilized to avoid the electrochemical corrosion of pipelines.This is accomplished by supplying an electric current to the structure that requires protection, such as a pipeline, from an external source.study aims to enhance the cathodic protection system by minimizing potential fluctuations along the pipeline hence preventing corrosion.It also aims to achieve economic feasibility by decreasing the number of anodes utilized.These objectives were accomplished by employing meta-heuristic optimization techniques.The present study involves formulating a mathematical model for a pipeline that provides fuel to the Al-Hilla 2 power plant in Iraq to assess the effectiveness of cathodic protection.Utilizing numerical simulation techniques, Multiphysics COMSOL, diverse scenarios are examined, resulting in the acquisition of substantial data.Subsequently, a neural network model is constructed using MATLAB.The primary factors influencing the distribution of cathodic protection potential are the numbers and positioning of the anodes and the output current.Subsequently, the optimization objectives involve determining the optimal anode number, position, and output current value by utilizing the Particle swarm organization (PSO) algorithm.The obtained results provide evidence that the proposed method holds a certain level of significance in guiding the design of cathodic protection systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".