MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022039370 · doi:10.1115/1.2744416

Hole-Drilling Residual Stress Profiling With Automated Smoothing

2007· article· en· W2022039370 on OpenAlexafffund
G. S. Schajer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Materials and Technology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTikhonov regularizationSmoothingHole drilling methodResidualResidual stressA priori and a posterioriRegularization (linguistics)Computer scienceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematicsInverse problemStatisticsMaterials scienceMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An effective procedure is presented that allows stable hole-drilling residual stress calculations using strain data from measurements taken at many small increments of hole depth. This use of many strain measurements is desirable because it improves the data content of the calculation, and the statistical reliability of the residual stress results. The use of Tikhonov regularization to reduce the noise sensitivity that is characteristic of a fine-increment calculation is described. This mathematical procedure is combined with the Morozov criterion to identify the optimal amount of regularization that balances the competing tendencies of noise reduction and stress solution distortion. A simple method is described to estimate the standard error in the strain measurements so that the optimal regularization can be chosen automatically. The possible use of a priori information about the trend of the expected solution is also discussed as a further means of improving the stress solution. The application of the described method is demonstrated with some experimental measurements, and realistic results are obtained.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations74
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Materials and TechnologySame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207