MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of Corroded Rock Bolts with Pulse Echo Tests

2017· article· en· W2594077360 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

VenueJournal of Infrastructure Systems · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicConcrete Corrosion and Durability
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcho (communications protocol)EngineeringForensic engineeringGeologyPulse (music)Geotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceStructural engineeringComputer scienceComputer securityElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual inspection of rock bolts could give some indications on their condition and performance. However, it might be misleading because most of the rock bolts are embedded in concrete or grouted in rock mass. Nondestructive methods have to be used for a proper diagnosis of the condition of rock bolts. This study deals with the determination and the location of the corrosion in rock bolts embedded in concrete using a pulse-echo test. Complementary tests were performed using an acoustic emission (AE) test, and measuring the mass loss from corrosion current. Pulse-echo test results showed that a decrease of the energy of the back echo and the trailing wall echo is indicative of the corrosion state. This method enables locating the flaws associated with the corrosion of rock bolts by the calculation of the normalized energy ratio between the echoes coming from the threads of healthy and corroded rock bolts. Results of acoustic emission and imposed electrochemical potential provide information on the corrosion initiation. This research indicates that the pulse-echo is an effective measurement technique for corrosion detection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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