MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404350478 · doi:10.1115/pvp2024-125010

Technical Basis for Proposed ASME Section XI Code Case on Evaluation Requirements for a Static Over-Pressure Event in Class 2 or 3 Piping System

2024· article· en· W4404350478 on OpenAlexaff
Steven X. Xu, Mark A. Moenssens, George Antaki, Raymond Pace

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipingEvent (particle physics)Section (typography)Class (philosophy)Code (set theory)Pressure vesselComputer scienceEngineeringReliability engineeringProgramming languageMechanical engineeringOperating systemPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the technical basis for a proposed ASME Section XI Code Case for assessing the structural integrity of a Class 2 or 3 metallic piping system after a static over-pressure event. Compliance with the required actions and acceptance criteria assures the piping system has adequate structural integrity to return to service. ASME Code Section III NCD-3600 currently provides overpressure allowances for Service Levels C and D events that exceed the allowable working pressure calculated by ASME Section III NCD-3640 Eq. (5). NCA-2142.4, Design, Service, and Test Limits, defines the level of damage caused by Service Levels C and D events as possibly causing: “large deformations in areas of structural discontinuity” for a service Level C event, and “gross general deformations with some consequent loss of dimensional stability and damage” for a Service Level D event. However, NCA-2142.4, or Section III and Section XI in general, does not address the actions to be taken if these permitted Service Level C or D over-pressure allowances occur, or if the pressure exceeds the Service Level C and D limits. The proposed Code Case specifies the actions required in case of a static overpressure event that exceeds the allowable working pressure but remains within the bounds currently permitted for a Service Level C event, or an event that exceeds the over-pressure allowance currently permitted for a Service Level C event but remain lower than the Service Level D limit. Over-pressure events that exceed the ASME Section III Level D limit are not addressed in the proposed Code Case but are planned for a future revision to the Code Case.

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)0.013
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207