MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068006339 · doi:10.1080/09349840109409693

Ultrasonic Tomographic Imaging of an Encased, Highly Attenuating Solid Medium

2001· article· en· W2068006339 on OpenAlexaff
TH Gan, D.A. Hutchins, D.R. Billson, Franklin C. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Nondestructive Evaluation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsBombardier Recreational Products (Canada)Defence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials sciencePropellantUltrasonic sensorTomographic reconstructionAttenuationSIGNAL (programming language)Solid-fuel rocketTransducerAcousticsTomographyOpticsPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasonic tomographic imaging has been performed on a highly attenuating, filled, hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene, cast into a steel case. The detection of defects and the characterization of solid rocket propellant were thus possible. Extremely low signal levels due to the attenuation and scattering properties of the polymer were present. In addition, a nonideal tomographic reconstruction geometry was present, because of a cylindrical air-filled cavity in the center of the polymer. Complications also arose from high-amplitude guided waves within the steel case, which tended to mask directly transmitted signals through the propellant. These problems were solved using specially designed transducers and pulse-compression signal processing techniques. Modifications to the filtered back-projection reconstruction procedure were made to account for the discontinuity caused by the hole. Images are presented showing the detection of an artificial defect to demonstrate the technique.

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)0.000
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations10
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Nondestructive EvaluationSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207