MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111961113 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1999.808041

Ultrasonic aluminum weld testing method based on the wavelet transform and a neural classifier

2003· article· en· W2111961113 on OpenAlexaff
S. Legendre, Daniel Massicotte, J. Goyette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic acoustic transducerNondestructive testingUltrasonic sensorUltrasonic testingWeldingWavelet transformWaveletFeature extractionArtificial neural networkClassifier (UML)AcousticsArtificial intelligenceTransducerComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an ultrasonic non-destructive weld testing method based on the wavelet transform and a neural network classifier. The use of Lamb waves generated by an electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) as a probe allows us to test metallic welds; in this work, the case of aluminum weld is treated. We explain how we proceed to do the feature extraction by using a method of analysis based on the wavelet transform of the ultrasonic testing signals; we propose a classification process of the features based on a neural classifier to interpret the results in terms of weld quality. The aim of this complete process of analysis and classification of the NDT ultrasonic signals is to lead to an automated system of weld or structure testing. Results of real-world ultrasonic Lamb waves signals analysis and classification for an aluminum weld are presented; these proved the feasibility 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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207