MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978902941 · doi:10.1080/09349840802043471

Optimization of Test Parameters for Magneto-Optic Imaging Using Taguchi's Parameter Design and Response-Model Approach

2008· article· en· W1978902941 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Nondestructive Evaluation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsResearch & Development Corporation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaguchi methodsFractional factorial designDesign of experimentsOrthogonal arraySample (material)Eddy currentSet (abstract data type)MagnetoFactorialFactorial experimentEngineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringStatisticsMathematicsMachine learningMagnet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magneto-optic/eddy current imaging (MOI) is becoming widely used for aging aircraft inspection for cracks and corrosion. However, many test parameters affect the accept/reject decision about a test sample and hence the overall performance of MOI system. The optimization of the parameters is extremely crucial in enhancing the performance of MOI system. This article uses the Taguchi method to change parameter values simultaneously to search for the optimum set of test parameters for maximizing system performance for a given sample geometry and critical crack. It is also important at the same time the system performance be unaffected by variations in parameters. Efficiency of Taguchi's partial factorial design is obvious. The optimum set of parameters is found by means of analyses of main effects. Analysis of variance identifies those parameters that need to be controlled carefully. A response-model approach is utilized as a complement to the Taguchi 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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.162 · 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