Contrastive learning method for leak detection in water distribution networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting and mitigating leaks in water distribution networks are vital for water conservation. Machine-learning-based (ML) acoustic leak detection models were introduced as effective alternatives for leak management. However, ML model training requires sufficient labeled data, which hinders related development. To address this challenge, this study employed contrastive learning (CL) for leak detection using limited labeled signals. Experimental results indicate that flip-x and amplitude scaling are optimal combinations for contrastive learning. Besides, ablation and t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) results reveal that increasing the model depth does not always yield performance improvement, and five convolutional blocks are more suitable for the leak detection problem in this study. Comparison experiments demonstrate that contrastive learning outperforms supervised learning (SL) when trained with insufficient labeled data. The out-of-sample validation results indicate that the proposed leak detection model is robust and effective in unexplored pipelines. The proposed framework significantly advances ML-based leak detection research and supports sustainable water management practices.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it