MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401217714 · doi:10.1080/09617353.2024.2369961

Prediction of water–main failures and management of the associated risks using integrated predictive analytics approach

2024· article· en· W4401217714 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Atefeh Delnaz, Fuzhan Nasiri, S. Samuel Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSafety and Reliability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnalyticsPredictive analyticsReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceEngineeringData miningData scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water distribution networks are vital to delivering potable water. They commonly include interconnected water mains (WMs), pumps and other hydraulic controls. Numerous WM failures have occurred due to ageing and harsh climate. This paper aims to predict the probability of future failures and integrate the predictions into risk-management strategies. The novelty lies in emphasising on the relevance to networks in cold regions like Canada. This study applied clustering and principal component analysis to the WM data from the Canadian City of Kitchener network. Clustering is shown to improve the failure prediction outcomes from the random forest algorithm and risk analysis output. Compared to without implementing clustering, the improvement reached 67–80% for WMs with high-rating risk. This paper successfully produced risk maps for Kitchener’s network, showing that only a small percentage (0.07–1.02%) of the existing WMs needs immediate action (prioritised rehabilitation or replacement). In addition to WM length and diameter, freeze index is shown to be an influence factor for failure predictions. The integrated, proactive approach discussed in this article can be applied to other cold-region WDNs. The results help reduce water losses and develop cost-effective, practical risk-management strategies.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.219
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSafety and ReliabilitySame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207