MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409499310 · doi:10.5006/c2022-17949

Challenges of Mitigating AC Interference Risks in a 107 Km Multi-Pipeline Corridor

2022· article· en· W4409499310 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Fault Detection and Protection
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)Cochrane
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)Interference (communication)Computer scienceEnvironmental scienceElectromagnetic interferencePipeline transportTelecommunicationsEnvironmental engineeringOperating systemChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An initial AC interference study and mitigation design was performed prior to construction, on the subject NPS 36, 107 km long pipeline (Pipeline A) installed in 2016. The subject pipeline is collocated with an NPS 30 pipeline (Pipeline B) constructed in 1999, for the entire route, and several other pipelines in some areas, all owned by the same operator and with shared cathodic protection systems. Five areas of powerline collocation were identified and modeled in the AC Interference study. During the commissioning survey, elevated AC voltages were recorded in areas with no identified powerlines. Furthermore, it was discovered that some pipeline bonds, existing mitigation systems and other pipelines were not modeled as per the final “as-built” installation or incorporated into the AC mitigation system. Subsequent site investigations were performed to confirm bonding, assess AC interference corrosion risks, and identify additional AC interference sources. The pipelines were remodeled to include the existing “as-built” configuration and these additional interference sources. Re-modeled results were assessed based on field collected data, remotely monitored data, and In-line Inspection (ILI) data on both pipelines to develop an integrated AC mitigation and monitoring system. Several lessons were learned, that can benefit future projects. These lessons include the importance of remodeling the as-built pipeline configuration, complexities related to AC interference in multi-pipeline corridors, and the difficulty in assessing the AC corrosion risk via modeling alone. Assessment and incorporation of site and ILI data into the final AC mitigation and monitoring system design leads to a more holistic result.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.226 · 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