MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1484790893 · doi:10.1063/1.3114222

PULSED EDDY CURRENT PROBE DESIGN BASED ON TRANSIENT CIRCUIT ANALYSIS

2009· article· en· W1484790893 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor J. Cadeau, Thomas W. Krause, Donald O. Thompson, Dale E. Chimenti

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy currentElectromagnetic coilMaterials scienceSkin effectResistive touchscreenTransient responseTransient (computer programming)Penetration depthExcitationPenetration (warfare)AcousticsEquivalent circuitElectrical engineeringOpticsVoltageEngineeringPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Probe design parameters affecting depth of penetration of pulsed eddy currents in multi‐layer aluminum 2024‐T3 were examined. Several probe designs were evaluated for their ability to detect a discontinuity at the bottom of a stack of aluminum plates. The reflection type probes, consisting of pick‐up coil and encircling drive coil, were characterized based on their transient response to a square pulse excitation. Probes with longer fundamental time constants, equivalent to a lower driving frequency, generated greater depth of penetration. However, additional factors such as inductive and resistive load, and excessive coil heating were also factors that limited signal‐to‐noise response with increasing layer thickness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207