Modelling the deterioration of water mains and planning their renewal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effective planning of water distribution system renewal requires accurate quantification of the structural deterioration of water mains. As typical water distribution systems comprise hundreds and even thousands of buried pipes, direct inspection of all of them is often prohibitively expensive. Identifying water main breakage patterns over time is an effective and inexpensive alternative to measure the structural deterioration of a water distribution system. National Research Council of Canada is developing a prototype computer application to help model the deterioration rates of water mains and subsequently plan their renewal.The analysis of water main breakage patterns considers time-dependent factors such as temperature, soil moisture (rainfall deficit), main replacement rates and cathodic protection (CP) strategies, including hotspot CP as well as methodical retrofit CP. The influence of each of these factors on pipe breakage rate can be quantified to (a) identifythe 'true' background deterioration rates of buried water mains, and (b) project the impact of various operational strategies on future breakage rates. Once the background ageing rates of water mains are known, their life cycle costs can be evaluated. As well, the future impact of various operational strategies on these life cycle costs can be assessed. Subsequently, strategies can be fine-tuned to achieve maximum efficiency in resource allocation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".