MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fuzzy-probabilistic evaluation for the dynamic instability of corroded buried pipes conveying fluids

2025· article· en· W4407271008 on OpenAlexafffund
Saher Attia, Fadi Oudah, Ahmed M. Abdelmaksoud

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Structures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityCairo University
KeywordsInstabilityProbabilistic logicFuzzy logicStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringCorrosionGeologyMaterials scienceComputer scienceMechanicsPhysicsComposite materialArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops fuzzy-probabilistic models to investigate the dynamic instability (i.e., the first instability point) of corroded buried pipes conveying fluids. The models are developed via a novel hybrid of random fields and fuzzy logic methods to capture both aleatoric uncertainty , stemming from the stochastic nature of pipeline, fluid, and soil parameters, and epistemic uncertainty , arising from corrosion inspection challenges, especially in urban areas. Key features of the models include: (1) applicability to various pipe geometries, fluid types, and soil stiffness distributions ; (2) Pipe Condition Index, on 0–100 scale, updatable from field inspection to reflect corrosion levels; and (3) uncertainty quantifiers including the random field significance level and fuzzy model coefficients . Results showcase the corrosion’s significant influence on dynamic instability. Furthermore, non-uniform soil stiffness distribution, with minimum stiffness at mid-span, increases the susceptibility to dynamic instability compared to the uniform soil case. The developed models achieve a high goodness-of-fit, with R 2 within 0.91–0.96, underscoring their accuracy in predicting the dynamic instability of corroded pipelines conveying fluids.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering StructuresSame topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207