MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2742491330 · doi:10.3390/met7080305

Inspection of Prebaked Carbon Anodes Using Multi-Spectral Acousto-Ultrasonic Excitation

2017· article· en· W2742491330 on OpenAlexafffund
Moez Ben Boubaker, Donald Picard, Carl Duchesne, Jayson Tessier, Houshang Alamdari, Mario Fafard

Bibliographic record

VenueMetals · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsAlcoa (Canada)Université Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesUniversité Laval
KeywordsAnodeUltrasonic sensorMaterials scienceExcitationCharacterization (materials science)Raw materialAcousticsPartial least squares regressionComputer scienceElectrodePhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reduction cell operation in primary aluminum production is strongly influenced by the properties of baked anodes. Producing consistent anode quality is more challenging nowadays due to the increasing variability of raw materials. Taking timely corrective actions to attenuate the impact of raw material fluctuations on anode quality is also difficult based on the core sampling and characterization scheme currently used by most anode manufacturers, because it is applied on a very small proportion of the anode production (about 1%), and long-time delays are required for lab characterization. The objective of this work is to develop rapid and non-destructive methods for the inspection of baked anodes. Previous work has established that sequential excitation of smaller parts collected from an industrial sized anode using acousto-ultrasonic signals at different frequencies allowed detecting and discriminating anode defects (pores and cracks). This was validated qualitatively using X-ray computed tomography. This work improves the method by using frequency-modulated excitation and building quantitative relationships between the acousto-ultrasonic signals and defects extracted from tomography images using Wavelet Transforms and Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression. The new excitation approach was found to provide similar or better inspection performance compared with sequential excitation, while requiring a shorter cycle time.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetalsSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207