MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033661711

Reliability-Based Management of Water Distribution
\nNetworks

2011· dissertation· en· W7033661711 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationAnalytic hierarchy processReliability (semiconductor)ScheduleProcess (computing)Scheduling (production processes)Management systemWater resourcesIntervention (counseling)Index (typography)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliability-Based Management of Water Distribution Networks
\nAlaa Salman, Ph.D.
\nConcordia University, 2011
\nCanada’s civil infrastructure systems have been in use for over 79 % of their expected service life. Municipalities in Canada have noted that 59% of their water systems needed repair and the condition of 43% of these systems is unacceptable. Therefore, a significant volume of rehabilitation projects are necessary to improve infrastructure performance. Reliability and criticality
\nassessments (RCA) as well as the ability to determine the most suitable methods of rehabilitation are urgently needed in order to allocate the available budget efficiently. The research presented in this thesis aims at developing a priority index (PI) for intervention that considers the combination of RCA for water networks. Sound techniques are utilized to develop the PI such as reliability theory, simple multi-attribute rating technique (SMART), and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP).
\nThe reliability assessment encompasses two levels: (1) segment and (2) subnetwork reliabilities. The priority index (PI) for intervention is crucial to schedule
\nsegment rehabilitation. Simple Multi Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) is used to select the most suitable methods of rehabilitation for these components.
\nSelection of a rehabilitation method is based on several factors: (1) technical feasibility, (2) whether the selection is contractually acceptable, (3) cost
\niv effectiveness, (4) environmental impact, and (5) whether the rehabilitation method is a new technology or not. The output of rehabilitation selection model is the method of rehabilitation for components coupled with the associated costs and durations for rehabilitation activities for each sub-network. The final stage of this research is to schedule these rehabilitation activities. Scheduling of the rehabilitation activities related to water main networks depends mainly on available budget and planning time. Other factors, such as network reliability, criticality, location, contract size, and rehabilitation method(s), also
\naffect the scheduling process. This research presents a method for optimizing the scheduling of rehabilitation
\nwork for water distribution networks. The method utilizes unsupervised neural networks (UNNs) and Mixed Integer Non Linear Programming (MINLP) and performs the scheduling in two stages. In the first stage, UNNs are used to group
\nwater mains according to their locations and rehabilitation methods. In the second stage, MINLP is used to determine the number of rehabilitation contract packages and to generate an optimized schedule based on these packages
\nconsidering network reliability, criticality, contract size, and planning time. Data on water network are collected from the city of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Four
\nsub-networks are selected randomly from the entire network to represent four types of land use; undeveloped, residential, park, and commercial/industrial. The
\ndata is used as a test bed to validate and demonstrate the use of the developed research methodology. An automated tool (DSSWATER), based on the developed methodology, is developed to assist users and decision makers. The
\ndeveloped models and tools are expected to be beneficial to municipal engineers and managers as well as to academics.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207