MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066531218

An Integrated Data-Driven Failure Prediction and Risk Management Approach for Water Mains

2023· dissertation· en· W7066531218 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Compatibility and Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisRisk managementRisk assessmentMains electricityPredictive modellingAction planAnalyticsProcess (computing)Water resourcesFailure mode and effects analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water distribution networks (WDNs) play a vital role in reliably delivering clean potable water to the society. The deterioration of water infrastructures that have drastically increased throughout the major urban centers has caused increasing water-main (WM) failures with severe consequences such as disruption of services and revenue losses. Effective management of WMs is essential. This involves repairing the WMs and implementing strategies to minimize water loss. Models should be used to predict breaks ahead of their occurrences and to plan rehabilitation. The use of these models would promote sustainable infrastructures and save costs. This research integrates the probability of failure (POF) derived from a random forest failure prediction model (predictive analytics) with a risk management strategy (prescriptive analytics) in a cold region in Canada. To investigate the effect of environmental factors, freezing index was considered and found to be among the top three most important attributes. In the proposed predictive analytics process Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was implemented for data reduction. Clustering is applied to avoid under/overestimating WM failure prediction and find the most similar cohorts. The results outlined that clustering considerably improved the prediction and risk-analysis outcomes. Finally, with the proposed risk management strategy, results showed that 3.68% of the network's total length is at high risk, and needs immediate action for fixing; however, it is only 0.07 to 1.02% of the network's total length when clustering was performed. Therefore, there was a 67–80% improvement in having WMs with high-rating risk compared to when no clustering was performed.

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)0.001
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 score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.259
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

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicElectromagnetic Compatibility and MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207