MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127847014 · doi:10.3390/s21041089

Acoustic Emission Signal Entropy as a Means to Estimate Loads in Fiber Reinforced Polymer Rods

2021· article· en· W3127847014 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammadhadi Shateri, Maha Ghaib, Dagmar Svecova, D. J. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch Manitoba
KeywordsRodAcoustic emissionFibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceComposite materialStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) rods are widely used as corrosion-resistant reinforcing in civil structures. However, developing a method to determine the loads on in-service FRP rods remains a challenge. In this study, the entropy of acoustic emission (AE) emanating from FRP rods is used to estimate the applied loads. As loads increased, the fraction of AE hits with higher entropy also increased. High entropy AE hits are defined using the one-sided Chebyshev’s inequality with parameter k = 2 where the histogram of AE entropy up to 10–15% of ultimate load was used as a baseline. According to the one-sided Chebyshev’s inequality, when more than 20% (k = 2) of AE hits that fall further than two standard deviations away from the mean are classified as high entropy events, a new distribution of high entropy AE hits is assumed to exist. We have found that the fraction of high AE hits. In glass FRP and carbon FRP rods, a high entropy AE hit fraction of 20% was exceeded at approximately 40% and 50% of the ultimate load, respectively. This work demonstrates that monitoring high entropy AE hits may provide a useful means to estimate the loads on FRP rods.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207