Crack Size Estimation Using a Combination of Cross Correlation and Phase Shift Correction in Ultrasonic Time-of-Flight Diffraction Method
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ultrasonic time-of-flight-diffraction (TOFD) detection method has been widely used in crack size assessment. The key issue in TOFD is to determine the arrival time of crack tip diffracted signal. In the traditional cross correlation method, the resulting maximum peak of cross correlation function between two signals indicates the time of flight between them. In practical ultrasonic measurement, the transmission wave may be distorted and phase shift may be introduced. This paper presents a method using cross correlation and phase shift correction to improve the accuracy of crack sizing in the TOFD framework. The resulting maximum peak of the cross correlation function between two signals combining with time delay introduced by phase shift determine the arrival time of diffracted signal. Experimental results are used to demonstrate the advantage of the proposed method.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it