MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594843143 · doi:10.1155/2017/7920649

A New Approach of Waveform Interpretation Applied in Nondestructive Testing of Defects in Rock Bolts Based on Mode Identification

2017· article· en· W2594843143 on OpenAlexafffund
Peiyuan Lin, Jinyuan Liu, Tianhong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Problems in Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsNondestructive testingWaveformRock boltSensitivity (control systems)Parametric statisticsAmplitudeStructural engineeringUltrasonic sensorFinite element methodAcousticsGroutGeologyDispersion (optics)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringOpticsMathematicsPhysicsElectronic engineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the characteristics of dispersion of guided waves, the waveforms recorded in ultrasonic nondestructive testing (NDT) of rock bolts are complicated to interpret. With a goal to increase the inspection sensitivity and accuracy in NDT of rock bolts, an approach of waveform interpretation based on wave modes identification is developed. The numerical simulation of full rock bolt and rock bolts with grout defect by Finite Element Method (FEM) is applied to illustrate the approach; it is found that the sensitive and low attenuation wave modes exist. Laboratory tests on full rock bolt and rock bolt with grout loss using NDT are conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the approach of waveform interpretation. In addition to that, a parametric study was conducted on rock bolt models with different sectional defect size. Based on the waveform interpretation, the mode‐based reflection coefficient R is proposed to evaluate the sensitivity of wave modes to the defect size of sectional area. It is found that the sensitivity of the wave mode does not change with the defect sectional area, and the amplitude depends on the size of the defect.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Problems in EngineeringSame topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207