MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007770823 · doi:10.3390/s141019354

Detection of Surface and Subsurface Cracks in Metallic and Non-Metallic Materials Using a Complementary Split-Ring Resonator

2014· article· en· W2007770823 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali M. Albishi, Omar M. Ramahi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKing Saud UniversityCMC Microsystems
KeywordsGround planeSplit-ring resonatorResonatorMicrowaveMicrostripMaterials sciencePrinted circuit boardAcousticsOptoelectronicsMillimeterElectronic engineeringOpticsComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Available microwave techniques for crack detection have some challenges, such as design complexity and working at a high frequency. These challenges make the sensing apparatus design complex and relatively very expensive. This paper presents a simple method for surface and subsurface crack detection in metallic and non-metallic materials based on complementary split-ring resonators (CSRRs). A CSRR sensor can be patterned on the ground plane of a microstrip line and fabricated using printed circuit board technology. Compared to available microwave techniques for sub-millimeter crack detection, the methods presented here show distinct advantages, such as high spatial resolution, high sensitivity and design simplicity. The response of the CSRR as a sensor for crack detection is studied and analysed numerically. Experimental validations are also presented.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations84
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207