MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ensemble Linear Regression and Paris’ Law Based Methods for Structure Fatigue Crack Length Estimation and Prediction Using Ultrasonic Wave Data

2019· article· en· W2977179614 on OpenAlexaff
Ming J. Zuo

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Conference of the PHM Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplitudeKurtosisUltrasonic sensorParis' lawLinear regressionRange (aeronautics)Structural engineeringFracture mechanicsMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsMaterials scienceEngineeringAcousticsCrack closurePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the methods developed for the 2019 PHM Conference Data Challenge. The PHM Data Challenge aims to estimate the fatigue crack length of a type of aluminum structure using ultrasonic signals at the current loading cycle, and to predict the crack length at multiple future loading cycles (multiple-step ahead prediction) as accurate as possible. For the crack length estimation, four crack sensitive features are extracted from ultrasonic signals, namely, the first peak value, root mean squared value, log of kurtosis and correlation coefficient. These features and their 2nd order interactions are used as inputs for an ensemble linear regression model which is built to map the features to crack length. The Best Subset Selection method is employed to select optimal features. For the crack length prediction, variations of the Paris’ law are derived to describe the mutual relationships between crack length and the number of loading cycles. The specimen material parameters and stress range of the Paris’ law are learned using the Genetic Algorithm, and updated with the next-step predicted crack length. The crack length corresponding to a future loading cycle number under constant amplitude cyclic loading and under variable amplitude cyclic loading is predicted respectively. The presented overall methodology achieves a score of 16.14 with the score calculation rule provided by the Data Challenge organization team, and ranks 3rd among all teams.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Conference of the PHM SocietySame topicUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave PropagationFrench-language works237,207