Enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of characterizing polymeric cellular structures using 3D-based computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterizing the morphology of polymeric foams is crucial for determining their practical applicability. The internal cellular structure of polymeric foams is typically analyzed by 2 D imaging techniques, such as Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and optical microscopy. The problem with these techniques is that their tests are tedious, destructive, and the accuracy of the obtained results is questionable. The objective of this paper is to establish and experimentally verify an efficient 3- dimensional (3 D) Microcomputed-tomography based methodology for reliably estimating and characterizing each of the phases commonly present in multiple types of polymeric foam samples, such as the open, the closed, and the solid phase. A comparative study was carried out between morphology data obtained from 2-dimensional (2 D) analysis and those obtained from 3 D analysis to investigate the reliability of the 2 D analysis results. In this context, the experimental results revealed that by using a 2 D method the open porosity was underestimated at the expense of closed porosity, which in turn was overestimated, while the total porosity was not impacted. Also, visualization of the internal structure of polymer foams by using Micro-CT provides details about the 3 D space which cannot be obtained from SEM images. The analysis of foamed specimen demonstrated that the polymeric foam phases extracted from Micro-CT images were in agreement with the experimentally measured values of total porosity of the samples. In an effort to reduce computational requirements, the effects of reducing data size on the accuracy of results has also been studied by averaging image pixels in 3 D space and the results were compared for multiple types of foam structures. This method reduced the processing time considerably, and yielded comparable porosity values. However, the number of detected pores were lowered due to the inability of this method to detect very small cells after 3 D averaging of image pixels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".