Application of physics-informed neural networks for nonlinear analysis of buried steel pipelines to support pipe reinforcement against ground movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buried pipelines are essential for the safe and efficient transportation of energy products such as oil, gas, and various chemical fluids. However, these pipelines are highly vulnerable to ground movements caused by geohazards such as seismic faults, landslide, liquefaction-induced lateral spreading, and soil creep, which can result in potential pipeline failures such as leaks or explosions. Response prediction of buried pipelines under such movements is critical for ensuring structural integrity, mitigating environmental risks, and avoiding costly disruptions. As such, this study adopts a Physics-Informed Neural Networks (PINNs) approach, integrated with a transfer learning technique, to predict structural response (e.g., strain) of both unreinforced and reinforced steel pipes subjected to Permanent Ground Displacement (PGD). The PINN method offers a meshless, simulation-free alternative to traditional numerical methods such as Finite Element Method (FEM) and Finite Difference Method (FDM), while eliminating the need for training data, unlike conventional machine learning approaches. The analyses can provide useful information for in-service pipe integrity assessment and reinforcement, if needed. The accuracy of the predicted results is verified against Finite Element (FE) and Finite Difference (FD) methods, showcasing the capability of PINNs in accurately predicting displacement and strain fields in pipelines under geohazard-induced ground movement.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".