MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405382184 · doi:10.1061/jpsea2.pseng-1711

Visualized Analysis of Mapping Knowledge Domains for Oil and Gas Pipelines Failure Research

2024· article· en· W4405382184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lei Xu, Xu Yong, Yunfu Wang, Wei Xiong, Pengfei Yu, Jian Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline transportPetroleum engineeringFossil fuelEngineeringEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringEnvironmental engineeringWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Failure analysis is a vital technique that is intended to strengthen the integrity management of oil and gas pipelines. The significance is to reduce economic losses and avoid or minimize major failure incidents. The aim of this study is to use bibliometric methods to research 2,533 papers retrieved from the Web of Science database spanning from 2004 to 2023. The analysis conducted using VOSviewer, focused on temporal trends, geographic distribution, major organizations, leading authors, journal co-citations, and literature co-citations. The objective is to uncover research hotspots and frontiers, providing insights to advance failure analysis and prevention techniques. The findings revealed a substantial surge in the number of papers related to failure analysis, escalating from 16 in 2004 to 190 in 2023, indicating an overall exponential growth trend. This growth has been most pronounced over the past 8 years. Noteworthy contributors to this field include China, the USA, Canada, England, and Iran, with Iran, Australia, and Italy exerting significant impact. In addition, the top three research producers are all from institutions or universities located in China. The journals Engineering Failure Analysis, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, and Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries exhibit the highest publication numbers. Significantly, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries and Gas Science and Engineering emerge as influential and highly regarded publications within this field. The study revealed that while the foundational theory and research framework in oil and gas pipeline failure have crystallized, a plethora of research directions and cutting-edge branches continue to emerge. Notably, the study of failure possibilities and behavior through Bayesian networks, failure characterization analysis, and finite element methods have emerged as the primary development directions and research hotspots. In terms of innovation, the application of bibliometric methods has enhanced the capacity to handle extensive literature databases and conduct network analyses. This study furnishes a theoretical foundation and guidance for the advancement of failure analysis and prevention techniques in the field of oil and gas pipelines.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0460.039
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.323 · 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.

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 venueJournal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and PracticeSame topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207