MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793181757 · doi:10.3390/s18010288

Machine Learning and Infrared Thermography for Fiber Orientation Assessment on Randomly-Oriented Strands Parts

2018· article· en· W2793181757 on OpenAlexafffund
Henrique Fernandes, Hai Zhang, Alisson Figueiredo, Fernando Costa Malheiros, Luís Henrique da Silva Ignacio, Стефано Сфарра, Clemente Ibarra‐Castanedo, Gilmar Guimarães, Xavier Maldague

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermography and Photoacoustic Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoConsortium de Recherche et d’innovation en Aérospatiale au QuébecPratt and Whitney CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesBombardier
KeywordsThermographyMaterials scienceFiberOrientation (vector space)AerospaceNondestructive testingStiffnessComposite materialInfraredStructural engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringOpticsAerospace engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of fiber reinforced materials such as randomly-oriented strands has grown in recent years, especially for manufacturing of aerospace composite structures. This growth is mainly due to their advantageous properties: they are lighter and more resistant to corrosion when compared to metals and are more easily shaped than continuous fiber composites. The resistance and stiffness of these materials are directly related to their fiber orientation. Thus, efficient approaches to assess their fiber orientation are in demand. In this paper, a non-destructive evaluation method is applied to assess the fiber orientation on laminates reinforced with randomly-oriented strands. More specifically, a method called pulsed thermal ellipsometry combined with an artificial neural network, a machine learning technique, is used in order to estimate the fiber orientation on the surface of inspected parts. Results showed that the method can be potentially used to inspect large areas with good accuracy and speed.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicThermography and Photoacoustic TechniquesFrench-language works237,207