MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402060182 · doi:10.1061/9780784485583.018

Statistical Analysis and Insight from the Water Research Foundation PCCP Failure Database 1942−2022

2024· article· en· W4402060182 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roberto J. Mascarenhas, Graham E. C. Bell, John Norton, Ed Padewski, Mike Higgins, John J. Galleher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoundation (evidence)Statistical analysisComputer scienceDatabaseHistoryStatisticsMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes a statistical analysis of a database collected by the Water Research Foundation (WRF) of prestressed concrete cylinder pipe (PCCP) failures in North America from 1942 to 2022. This database, with almost 50,000 data points collected, is part of two separate research efforts for Projects #4034 and #5069 and is sourced from utilities in the United States and Canada. These WRF projects examine PCCP failures for trends which were co-sponsored and funded by the USEPA and Great Lakes Water Authority. Failures are grouped into one of the three categories, each with descriptive factors, including age, location, size, pipe type, installation date, etc. Via simple yet comprehensive analytics, failures can be graphed as a function of their descriptive factors and subsequent inferences can be made such as: are there locations of PCCP at higher risk than others, which installation dates/periods have the most failures, does size matter, etc.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207