MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406265797 · doi:10.1109/ismar62088.2024.00086

Extended Reality and Digital Twin in the Oil and Gas Pipeline Industry: A Systematic Review on Applications, Trends, and Future Directions

2024· review· en· W4406265797 on OpenAlexafffund
Muskan Sarvesh, Ryan Kang, Hyeongil Nam, Simon Park, Ron Hugo, Frank Maurer, Kangsoo Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsPipeline (software)Petroleum industryFossil fuelComputer sciencePipeline transportPetroleum engineeringData scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immersive and simulation technologies, such as Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), Mixed Reality (MR), and Digital Twins (DTs), have proven effective in enhancing decision-making, streamlining operations, and improving safety through intuitive visualizations. Unsurprisingly, the oil and gas (O&G) pipeline industry is increasingly turning to these technologies to tackle complex construction and resource management challenges. This paper reviews the applications, benefits, and future trends of these technologies, focusing on integration and emerging trends in monitoring, training, maintenance, and testing. It identifies potential gaps, offers guidance for future research, and emphasizes adapting to technological evolution, providing insights to improve system reliability and sustainability in O&G pipeline operations using immersion and simulation methods.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207